I slowed down because the car in front of me slowed down...then WHAM! The guy told the cop that he hit me because I stopped...I was turning right...slowed down because the car turning in front of me slowed, plus i was checking for oncoming traffic...how the heck could that be my fault???
2007-11-04 14:20:13 · 21 answers · asked by curiosity 3 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Safety
I believe the law states that you are suppose to leave enough distance between yourself and the car in front of you for just that reason, in case they stop suddenly. That is why in almost all cases the person who rear-ended you is at fault, even in a multi-car pile-up.
It doesn't matter why you stopped... even if the guy in front of you caused the chain-reaction, you managed to miss hitting him because you had enough room. The person behind you should have been paying attention.
On the other hand, if you cut the guy off and then he hit you because he didn't have enough time or space to react, that is a different story.
2007-11-04 14:33:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
In your situation, as you described it, it may not be your fault, but, I CAN be.
Consider this, you have described that you slowed down because a car in front of you slowed down.
THEN you say that you were turning right, and stopped to check for oncoming traffic. (I will assume that you meant cross traffic coming from the left)
These two situations read like different versions of what happened.
Situation #1. You slowed (and stopped) because the car in front slowed. If your brake lights were not working properly, YOU may be assigned a percentage of responsibility, because YOU, as the vehicle's operator, are responisble for the proper operation of safety equipment.
Situation #2. You stopped because you wanted to check for traffic before making a turn. (WHAT happened to the car that slowed down in front of you? Did he continue across the intersection?) If the light was green, (allowing the front car to continue) then you did not need to come to a stop, and, in fact, should NOT have stopped, but, merely slowed down to observe for oncoming cross traffic. If this was the case, again, YOU may be assigned some financial responsibility.
So, we can't give you a good assesment of "who's fault" it is because of an inconsistancy in your story and because we don't have all the information needed to give you a good answer.
2007-11-06 14:47:41 · answer #2 · answered by Vince M 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As far as I know, it's almost always considered the fault of the person in the back. That said, there are probably certain exceptions, and the final decision would have to rest with the insurance company or some law official investigating the case. You're probably okay, but you had better make sure.
2007-11-04 14:29:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
In almost all cases, in my opinion, it is the other person's fault who rear ends you, because they are supposed to be paying attention to the car in front of them. In your case, the other driver may have been following too close behind you when you stopped and they hit you. You have to leave enough breaking time between cars. At least one car length's worth.
I got hit over a year ago in the front of my car, and I was not found to be at fault. I was parked, and the idiot lady pulled over to park in front of me, and then just backed up into me, even after I honked for minutes! That's a rare exception to a driver being hit in the front of their car and the other driver to be found at fault. But, it wasn't an easy win for me. I had one witness and I took pictures of my car and the proximity of my car as to where the other driver had initially pulled over.
I would suggest you fight your situation. You obviously didn't want to hit the car in front of you who stopped, so the driver behind you should have been paying attention.
Good luck to you.
2007-11-04 14:33:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
might desire to you record a declare? i think of you mustn't. i think any state that enables an uninsured motive force to record a declare against an insured motive force is negligent in upholding that state's regulation if that state demands each guy or woman who operates a motorized motor vehicle to have coverage. The state wherein I stay in basic terms matters citations to those in touch in an vehicle accident who do not carry coverage. The super may be as much as $a million,000. regrettably, this state in basic terms assessess a $one hundred to $500 super to those who don't have a valid motive force's license. individually, i think every physique who's working a motor vehicle and not utilising a valid motive force's license and/or the minimum quantity of vehicular coverage, and is in touch in an accident, could be considered a felon, spend a minimum of six months in penal complex, and have a legal checklist. What happens while you're in touch in an accident it quite is your "fault", and somebody dies?
2016-10-01 22:30:59 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's his fault (unless you live in a "no fault" state, were no person is assigned the "blame"). The motorist behind is responsible for maintaing sufficient distance to stop safely, regardless of why you might have had to stop suddenly (lots of potential reasons: something in the road, cat runs in front of your car, etc.).
2007-11-04 14:26:48 · answer #6 · answered by jglick1999 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
If you were hit in the rear, it is the fault of the driver of the vehicle that hit you! The law requires that you maintain control of your vehicle at all times! You have to allow enough room to stop in an emergency! The striking driver did not do so, and therefore is at fault!
2007-11-04 17:14:06 · answer #7 · answered by fire4511 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't matter what you or the other guy say, it matters what the judge says if it gets that far.
In all probability (assuming you're both insured) his carrier will want to settle. If they ask you if you had any physical injury, say you don't know....9 times out of 10 they'll make an offer right then as an incentive for you not to see a doctor.
2007-11-04 14:29:41 · answer #8 · answered by CLD 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, Its not your fault. The guy who hit you from the back should be at fault. I've been working at the car industry for a few years now. Many experiences would be that your not at fault, and your liable to claim compensation from him. Good luck.
2007-11-04 14:27:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
in my state we have no-fault insurance so i'm not 100% sure but i've always heard that it IS the other driver's fault if you get rearended. the only way i could possibly imagine it being your fault is if all of your brake lights were burned out and it was a busy road or something.
2007-11-04 14:25:13 · answer #10 · answered by john_mgd 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋