Girlfriend in a non-serious car accident - advice?

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

/looks at profile location

California? What the hell do you know about snow?

If you've got winter driving experience, good tires, and good visibility, the speed limit can easily be driven at or above. I just personally need to mind the snowdrifts, as a Civic makes for a lousy plow.

- M4H

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

/looks at profile location

California? What the hell do you know about snow?

If you've got winter driving experience, good tires, and good visibility, the speed limit can easily be driven at or above. I just personally need to mind the snowdrifts, as a Civic makes for a lousy plow.

- M4H

I'm often times passing poeple who drive like total asshats in the snow. Doing 20 on a 55 MPH highway. Granted, it was snowing to beat hell, slick as ice and there was a car in the ditch about 50 yards behind where I passed her......But, thats why they make 4WD.

 

[SoftwareEng]

Originally posted by: Rastus
Since he hit her in the rear with the front of his vehicle, he will be found at fault. Anything he says will not be considered.

Even if she 'cut him off' as he says, it's still his responsibility to drive in such a manner as to prevent those types of accidents.

it's not true, they will take into account her braking. If she slammed the brakes for no reason (or maybe was setting up for insurance fraud - of course it's just an example), she will be partially liable.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: SoftwareEng

Originally posted by: Rastus
Since he hit her in the rear with the front of his vehicle, he will be found at fault. Anything he says will not be considered.

Even if she 'cut him off' as he says, it's still his responsibility to drive in such a manner as to prevent those types of accidents.

it's not true, they will take into account her braking. If she slammed the brakes for no reason (or maybe was setting up for insurance fraud - of course it's just an example), she will be partially liable.

That's never going to be proven, if she did though.. Snow = no skid marks = no proof of braking too quickly other than hearsay.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: SoftwareEng

Originally posted by: Rastus
Since he hit her in the rear with the front of his vehicle, he will be found at fault. Anything he says will not be considered.

Even if she 'cut him off' as he says, it's still his responsibility to drive in such a manner as to prevent those types of accidents.

it's not true, they will take into account her braking. If she slammed the brakes for no reason (or maybe was setting up for insurance fraud - of course it's just an example), she will be partially liable.

My mom rear-ended a guy who slammed on his brakes for no reason and was found 100% liable. In the eyes of the law, they figure that if you rear-end somebody, you weren't looking out or were following too closely which = your fault.

 

[FusionKnight]

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

She did. She was doing 90km/h when she began braking.

FK

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: FusionKnight

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

She did. She was doing 90km/h when she began braking.

FK

Your OP said 100km/hr. Which one is it?

 

[TwinkleToes77]

Originally posted by: FusionKnight

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

She did. She was doing 90km/h when she began braking.

FK

if the roads were bad enough that he was slip sliding all over before he hit her.. then wtf would either of them be going so fast?

 

[mugs]

I don't believe for a second that the guy was 1/2 KM behind your girlfriend when she changed lanes. However, it is her word against his, and she was rear-ended. In almost all cases that will be ruled the fault of the person in the rear. It doesn't really matter if he has a witness in his car, because that person is obviously loyal to the driver of the other vehicle.

 

[cyclistca]

Originally posted by: FusionKnight

Originally posted by: chambersc
Did you phone the police at all to get a report of the incident? They could be both found to be at fault, here.

Yup, a police report has been filed. She was all over that. The guy who hit her wasn't so studious and didn't file a police report until days after the accident. When he did finally get around to it, he said that my girlfriend had cut him off, apparently.

FK

They fact that she filed right away were the other guy took his time will also help with her case.

 

[FusionKnight]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: FusionKnight

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

She did. She was doing 90km/h when she began braking.

FK

Your OP said 100km/hr. Which one is it?

It was 90km/hr. Thanks for the catch - edited OP.

FK

 

[FusionKnight]

Originally posted by: TwinkleToes77

Originally posted by: FusionKnight

Originally posted by: jmgonzalez
If the snow is coming down and road conditions are getting bad, shouldn't that tell you that you should slow down way below the 110km/h speed limit?

She did. She was doing 90km/h when she began braking.

FK

if the roads were bad enough that he was slip sliding all over before he hit her.. then wtf would either of them be going so fast?

Bad judgment?

FK

 

[FusionKnight]

Originally posted by: mugs
I don't believe for a second that the guy was 1/2 KM behind your girlfriend when she changed lanes. However, it is her word against his, and she was rear-ended. In almost all cases that will be ruled the fault of the person in the rear. It doesn't really matter if he has a witness in his car, because that person is obviously loyal to the driver of the other vehicle.

The guy who hit her was obviously going faster than my girlfriend at the time of the lane change, but 500m is plenty of room to the guy to slow down when he sees the brake lights of the vehicle in front of him. Believe what you like - that's what happened.

FK