Is that always your fault if you rear ended another car before you?

[rc5]

Say, if a car before you stops suddenly and you can't stop in time, is that all your fault?

 

[Ryan]

I believe so. You should constantly keep a two car distance or more between you and the car in from of you.

 

[UberNeuman]

Yes. You are to be driving alert and giving enough space between your car and the one in front of you...

 

[Hallzy]

Yes eventhough you leave space and $#!T happens...it is still your fault

 

[glen]

One time, at night, it was snowing on a moutain road.
I was driving on an interstate highway at the speed minimum, 40mph.
A car ahead of me was parked on the highway in the right lane.
I hit it, and it was my fault.

 

[Daniel]

I think the rule they give is 1 car length per 10 mph you are driving, and if you are only 10 ft behind doing 50 miles an hour you can't stop if he locks up his brakes, sorry but I'd imagine they will find it to be your fault.

 

[Muadib]

Yes, because you were either following too close, or not paying attention.

 

[conjur]

Unless that person was backing up...maybe?

 

[Ornery]

Oh really? I got a scenario for you. You turn right onto a very busy, fast moving street in front of somebody and they rear end you. Whose fault then? The guy that hits you better have witnesses, that's all I can say! Uh, whose fault it is and who gets ticketed are two different things.

 

[Redwingsguy]

yes sometimes though it does piss me off, like I was turning into my school parking lot in the morning when its usually full of traffic. As we're going into the lot, the car in front of my stops half way around the turn, I didnt realize till a little later that they werent just going really slow, they were stopped, so I slammed on the brakes and just nudged them a little, no harm done, but still, there was no one in front of them, just that some people like to spontaneously stop! :|

 

[rh71]

<< Oh really? I got a scenario for you. You turn right onto a very busy, fast moving street in front of somebody and they rear end you. Whose fault then? The guy that hits you better have witnesses, that's all I can say! Uh, whose fault it is and who gets ticketed are two different things. >>



The vehicle moving straight always has the right of way (except at stop signs).

 

[spidey07]

Yes, no matter what the scenario it is always the person who rear-ended. Even in the one above, still the guy who rear-ended.

at least from a insurance perspective. I used to work in that field.

 

[Ornery]

<Buzzzzzzzzzzzzz> We have a winner! rh71 blew it, spidey07 moves on to the next round...

 

[brxndxn]

On Christmas Day 3 years ago, I crashed into the back of another car that seemed to be parked on the road. This was at night on a road that was mostly blocked by trees with virtually no light. I didn't see the car until the light from my headlights hit the back of the car and there wasn't enough time to stop.

However, it was found to be not my fault because the car that I hit had no lights - no side lights, no turning signal, and no brake lights - so how the hell was I supposed to see it? They were planning on making a left-hand turn and were stopped in the middle of the road. Turns out that the kids driving the car tried to install a stereo that they got for Christmas and cut the wires to their back lights.

So, YES, it is possible to rear-end a car and it not be your fault.

 

[Renob]

Yes, no matter what the scenario it is always the person who rear-ended. Even in the one above


You Sir are Wrong.

I live on a streat that has 2 lanes both ways.
I was backing out of my driveway looked down the road and saw a guy driving on the inside lane.
He was about 250 from my drive way. I back out into the outside lane next to the side walk..
Im in the out side lane, I put on my brakes put the car into drive and just as I do BANG he rearends me..
The bottom line is he was on the road and had the rightaway even thou he rear ended me It was my fault.

So not everyong who rearends someone is at fault.

 

[Viperoni]

<< Yes, no matter what the scenario it is always the person who rear-ended. Even in the one above, still the guy who rear-ended.

at least from a insurance perspective. I used to work in that field. >>



Spidey is indeed correct....sadly it's true
Insurance companies = evil!

 

[Ornery]

If you can get the guy that pulls in front of you, or backs onto the street to admit it to the cop, or have witnesses to testify to that fact, you'll be OK. Otherwise you're screwed. Gotta have that proof or you lose, even though it was their fault.

 

[Renob]

Spidey is indeed correct....sadly it's true



You my friend just sat down next to spidey on the Wrong bench.

It was both his Insurance and my insurance that agreed that it was my fault.
BTW my insurance com. was State Farm

 

[Ornery]

Massachusetts Accident & Injury FAQ

• One of the standards says that the driver behind in a rear-end collision is presumed to be at fault.

Proving Fault in Vehicle Accidents

• If someone hits you from behind, it is virtually never your fault, regardless of why you stopped.

PERSONAL INJURIES AND ACCIDENT CLAIMS

• For example, in the case of a rear end collision it is obvious that the following car driver is 100% at fault.

What To Do In Case of an Accident

• If another party is clearly at fault,such as in the case of a rear end collision...

Edit: However, if someone is stupid enough to admit they pulled in front of somebody else, the cops and insurance carrier will be happy to make an exception!

 

[BigToque]

What happens in the event someone changes lanes and cuts you off then has to suddenly stop. You did everything correct but this guy swerved in front of you and no longer had the space to stop and you rear end him.

 

[pulse8]

It's still your fault. You should've given them enough room once they got into the lane.

 

[Ornery]

Stefan, that's the whole point. You know it's their fault, they know it's their fault, but you'll still get the damn ticket. If that happens to you, get the license number of cars around you that may have seen it happen. They're your only hope of getting out of it. Oh, unless the guy admits he cut you off... like that'll happen!

 

[BigToque]

<< It's still your fault. You should've given them enough room once they got into the lane. >>



Well I was saying that right after they cut you off they had to suddenly stop. Because they cut you off, you had no time to give them enough room.

 

[apoppin]

It's the fault of the driver that hit the car in front of them. They are SUPPOSED to be paying attention.

Actually, I have been hit from behind twice. Whiplash involving spinal cord injury is no fun and may require an operation or years of therapy. In fact I am heading to Hawaii next week for 10 weeks of therapy.

I had a lawyer for my first case who mentioned there are rare mitigating circumstances . . . sometimes a small percentage of "blame" is assigned to the driver who "suddenly stopped" - but this is just in the case of negotiating the settlement not for the ticket.

In both of my cases - the driver that hit me was deemed to be 100% at fault (I settled the second case better WITHOUT a lawyer - I guess experience counts for something).

Also, where FRAUD is involved - if you are in a "set-up" accident - the driver hitting the car in front may not be at fault - but you'd better have witnesses and proof of prior fraud on the part of the other driver.

 

[OS]

I think one exception is when the car you rear end has nonfactory brake lights (ricers and their freakish aftermarket lights)