I am following a car and entering into the far right lane as we approach an intersection. The car in front of me suddenly slams on her brakes and I hit her at 3 - 4 mph, after slamming on mine. She admits that a corvette on the opposite side of the light appeared to be making a U turn in front of her, which is why she did not complete her right hand turn and just slammed her brakes at the intersection instead of continuing her turn. She yielded, by braking, even though she had the right of way. I was behind her and rear ended her car. Do I have total liability?
2007-10-31 14:52:00 · 19 answers · asked by D. S 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Insurance & Registration
A Police investigation would reveal you failed to have a safe following distance, which is a minor offense. The insurance company would probably find that you where between 70-80% at fault.
Criminal wise you will not find many issues, just a ticket if you take care of the victims damage.
Insurance wise if it's your first points, and offense you should be fine, with a small increase if that. You only hit her at 3-4 so Failure to Stop or Reckless Driving I don't think would be written.
2007-10-31 15:01:24 · answer #1 · answered by Testhaha 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are two different parts to consider: Criminal Fault and Civil Liability.
Criminally, you are probably guilty of following too closely. There are a few instances where you might not be at fault. If you could demonstrate that the driver in front of you did not properly signal his intentions, you can sometimes get off. If the car in front of you made a deliberate stop to force you into an accident, then that is consider criminal intent, and he is guilty. Unfortunately, these are tough to prove.
Civil liability relates to who is responsible for the damages. You have to demonstrate something called negligence in order to collect damages. Negligence has (4) parts: 1) Legal Duty Owed; 2) Legal Duty Breached; 3) Actual Damages; 4) Proximate Cause.
Part 1: You have a legal duty to avoid hitting the car in front of you.
Part 2: You breached your legal duty by following too closely.
Part 3: Actual damages. Did you actually damage his car. Or, was the car damaged before you hit it?
Part 4: Was there a "proximate cause", or a cause-effect relationship, from your following too closely, and his car being damaged.
Part 4 is the tricky part. If the man complains of neck pain, but was already going to the chiropractor prior to the accident, it may be difficult for him to demonstrate that you caused the damage to his neck.
If somehow you can demonstrate that the corvette caused the accident, you can avoid liability. Tough to do, since the corvette didn't stop.
In short, you are not "automatically guilty" when you rear-end somebody. But it's really hard to demonstrate that it's someone elses fault.
The last part of your question is "do I have TOTAL liability." There is a term called Contributory Negligence, in which a portion of the blame is assigned to each driver in the accident. Had the car in front of you collided with the corvette, then the corvette drive would share a portion of the liability.
My years of experience as an insurance agent suggest that you are probably at least 51% negligent. In which case, you will be responsible for paying her damages.
2007-10-31 15:35:59 · answer #2 · answered by Jeff C 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like you were, for following too closely. Whether or not she thought there was another car doing a U turn, you should always maintain a decent enough distance to be able to stop should the vehicle in front of you come to a sudden stop. A lot of people will slam on their brakes in situations like that if someone is tailgating them...because it is quite annoying.
2007-10-31 14:56:13 · answer #3 · answered by zanilth1984 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Most likely they will find you completely responsible. The thought process behind this is that if you allowed enough distance, you would have had enough time to stop fast without hitting the other person. That being said, I do not agree that this is the case in all circumstances. If is raining or snowing, you may not be able to stop when you want to. There should be a few exceptions.
2007-10-31 15:01:45 · answer #4 · answered by Mrs. Goddess 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That you do. When you rear end another car you are always and totally at fault. It's called "following to close" and/or "failure to control your vehicle". The other person can stop anytime for any reason they want. You have to make sure you don't hit them.
2007-10-31 14:59:26 · answer #5 · answered by mustanger 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes you were following to close. the only way it wouldn't be is if her brake lights didn't work or if the car in front of you was hit and driven back into you
2007-10-31 14:57:40 · answer #6 · answered by koma 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes you are the at fault vehicle, a driver must maintain control of their vehicle and not follow to close to the vehicle in front of them. I am a police officer and work a lot of traffic crashes, if I worked this scene you would be cited for following to close and not maintaining control of your vehicle.
2007-10-31 15:15:53 · answer #7 · answered by trackerd2 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it you can't stop in time when the car in front of you does a panic stop, you are following too close and at fault.
2007-10-31 15:01:15 · answer #8 · answered by oklatom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you're fully liable. You need to maintain a safe distance at all times. You cannot assume that the car in front of you will maintain its speed.
2007-10-31 20:36:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. You are required to keep your car under control at all times.
You should anticipate a car in front of you making a sudden stop under such circumstances.
2007-10-31 17:23:30 · answer #10 · answered by Barry auh2o 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋