Car accident... whom is at fault?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Car accident... whom is at fault?

Aaroona

3193 posts

Uber Geek

#204289 25-Sep-2016 15:26

Let me describe the scenario here;

4 cars were traveling on the motorway head south. (Refer to them as Car A, B, C and D)

During rush hour for whatever reason, car A braked abruptly. Car B then had to apply brakes heavily, but had enough room to stop and did not hit car A.

Car C did not apply brakes in time/did not have enough room to stop and rear ended Car B. Car D then hit Car C (to the best of my knowledge).

I'm trying to understand how the "assignment of blame" would work in this case. I was always lead to believe that the person at the tail end of it was classed as "at fault" for the entire incident because the did not stop in time, however, I assume there are some situations where this may or may not be the case?

Does anyone have any first hand knowledge of a situation like this? or know how a situation like this would be resolved in terms of accountability?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

785 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1640262 25-Sep-2016 15:59

This is just my personal opinion and would say that person C is at fault, if they hit car B with little or no breaking how was the driver in car D know that they were stopping at all and may not have had any stopping distance left as car C has effectively stoped instantly. Just my 2c

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1640265 25-Sep-2016 16:01

I would say car C

What you are thinking is Car D hits Car C which makes Car C hit Car B etc. In the case above you said car C hit Car B before car D hit Car C.

In these types of things however I would call my insurance company and get them to sort it out with Car C and Car D

MadEngineer

4271 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1640268 25-Sep-2016 16:11

Aaroona:

Let me describe the scenario here;

4 cars were traveling on the motorway head south. (Refer to them as Car A, B, C and D)

During rush hour for whatever reason, car A braked abruptly. Car B then had to apply brakes heavily, but the driver was smart and had enough room to stop and did not hit car A. Well done Car B

Car C was dumb and was following too closely and did not apply brakes in time/did not have enough room to stop and rear ended Car B. Car D then hit Car C (to the best of my knowledge).

Don't be like Car C nor Car D. Be more like Car B.

FTFY

5.9 Stopping and following distances

(1)A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.

(2)A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.

(3)A driver must not drive on a road a vehicle following behind another vehicle so that the driver cannot stop the driver's vehicle short of the vehicle ahead if the vehicle ahead stops suddenly.

(4)No driver may drive a motor vehicle on any road following behind another vehicle at a distance behind that vehicle of less than—
- (a)16 m, if his or her speed is 40 km an hour or more but less than 50 km an hour; or
- (b)20 m, if his or her speed is 50 km an hour or more but less than 60 km an hour; or
- (c)24 m, if his or her speed is 60 km an hour or more but less than 70 km an hour; or
- (d)28 m, if his or her speed is 70 km an hour or more but less than 80 km an hour; or
- (e)32 m, if his or her speed is 80 km an hour or more but less than 90 km an hour; or
- (f)36 m, if his or her speed is 90 km an hour or more.

You're not on Atlantis anymore, Duncan Idaho.

Aaroona

3193 posts

Uber Geek

#1640269 25-Sep-2016 16:12

tripp:

I would say car C

What you are thinking is Car D hits Car C which makes Car C hit Car B etc. In the case above you said car C hit Car B before car D hit Car C.

In these types of things however I would call my insurance company and get them to sort it out with Car C and Car D

Yeah, that was my thinking as well.
I have spoken to the insurance company, but my excess is quite high which I have to pay if I want my car repaired asap, even though I'm not at fault, until the insurance company can confirm who is liable.

I'm going in tomorrow morning to get a quote on how much it'll cost to fix. I doubt it'll be less than my excess, but you never know...

If it did come out less than my excess, would it be worth attempting to sort it privately? I know it's kind of ass-about-face considering I pay for insurance, but if the cost of repair comes out less than my excess (potentially more of a benefit to liable party I suppose) and I have the ability to not affect my premiums, I'd rather give that a shot if possible, which is part of the reason I'm wanting to understand where the liability would be (well that, and out of interest as well).

Unfortunately even non-liable claims can affect your premiums. So the cost of excess if I'm not at fault is a moot point, but the likelihood of affecting my premiums however.

Will see how I get on tomorrow morning.

MadEngineer

4271 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1640280 25-Sep-2016 16:25

Aaroona:

however, I assume there are some situations where this may or may not be the case?

if car A was proven to be driving dangerously, then perhaps. Would also not apply if Car A was in another lane beside you at any distance in front of you and they pulled into your lane only to suddenly stop.

You're not on Atlantis anymore, Duncan Idaho.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1640281 25-Sep-2016 16:38

I'd go through the insurance company anyway. You have a duty to inform them on any accident regardless of if you make a claim, and they can rate you accordingly.

Not going through them may make it harder to prove to them you were not at fault, as they would not be a party to any claim and therefore not have any info.

Plus, if there is any problem with the repair later down the track your insurer would have to sort it.

Twitter: ajobbins

Aaroona

3193 posts

Uber Geek

#1640282 25-Sep-2016 16:40

ajobbins:

I'd go through the insurance company anyway. You have a duty to inform them on any accident regardless of if you make a claim, and they can rate you accordingly.

Not going through them may make it harder to prove to them you were not at fault, as they would not be a party to any claim and therefore not have any info.

Plus, if there is any problem with the repair later down the track your insurer would have to sort it.

Yeah that's a fair point, actually.

I guess I'll just let it play out and see what happens.

From what I understand there may also be footage given where the incident happened, as there are a number of traffic cameras in the area.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1640292 25-Sep-2016 17:38

Aaroona:

Yeah that's a fair point, actually.

I guess I'll just let it play out and see what happens.

From what I understand there may also be footage given where the incident happened, as there are a number of traffic cameras in the area.

Good luck with the cameras. When I last asked about that they didnt record most of them and the reason given was one of privacy BS.

Richard rich.ms

Aaroona

3193 posts

Uber Geek

#1640294 25-Sep-2016 17:47

richms:

Aaroona:

Yeah that's a fair point, actually.

I guess I'll just let it play out and see what happens.

From what I understand there may also be footage given where the incident happened, as there are a number of traffic cameras in the area.

Good luck with the cameras. When I last asked about that they didnt record most of them and the reason given was one of privacy BS.

Interesting - the cop was the one to suggest it actually. Who would I request the footage from if I was to get it?

I suppose I could go via fyi.org.nz, but there must be an easier way.

Azzura

603 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#1640295 25-Sep-2016 17:50

If I have read it correctly...

Car C following too close... is at fault for rear ending B.

Car D following too close... is at fault for rear ending C.

jarledb

Webhead
3253 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1640296 25-Sep-2016 17:55

Azzura:

If I have read it correctly...

Car C following too close... is at fault for rear ending B.

Car D following too close... is at fault for rear ending C.

That would be my assessment as well.

Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1640297 25-Sep-2016 18:00

In my insurance I don't pay an excess if the at fault person can be identified. Regardless of whether the insurance company can recover costs.

Talk it through with your insurance company as they know your policy and do this all the time, just a process to them which gives structure you can work with. All my dealings with claims have been very painless in the past (except with CC travel insurance, but thats another story haha).

Jase2985

13457 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1640300 25-Sep-2016 18:14

surfisup1000:

In my insurance I don't pay an excess if the at fault person can be identified. Regardless of whether the insurance company can recover costs.

Talk it through with your insurance company as they know your policy and do this all the time, just a process to them which gives structure you can work with. All my dealings with claims have been very painless in the past (except with CC travel insurance, but thats another story haha).

Same with my policies, if it sounds like it wasnt your fault on the phone, and they can get a hold of the other person at the time they they wave the excess.

Its then up to my insurance company and the other peoples to sort out whos at fault and recover the costs.

Aaroona

3193 posts

Uber Geek

#1640301 25-Sep-2016 18:14

surfisup1000:

In my insurance I don't pay an excess if the at fault person can be identified. Regardless of whether the insurance company can recover costs.

Talk it through with your insurance company as they know your policy and do this all the time, just a process to them which gives structure you can work with. All my dealings with claims have been very painless in the past (except with CC travel insurance, but thats another story haha).

I don't pay excess either once they've confirmed that I was in fact not at fault - but if I want to get my car fixed before they've been able to confirm with the owner/driver of Car C, then I have to pay the excess in the mean time, after which they'll refund.
I did identify the vehicle by registration for them, including driver licence number, name and DOB of driver and police incident number.

I didn't have a contact number for the driver, but I have since located one for them and called the insurance company with the details.

I'll have a chat with them tomorrow. The part I'm not overly sure about is how they "confirm liability" - at the end of the day, my vehicle has damage to the rear side of it and not the front, that coupled with the police report I would have thought would be enough, but I guess not?

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1640304 25-Sep-2016 18:20

Doesn't it depend on why car A braked?. eg. I car A was to brake intentionally in the hope of causing an accident, wouldn't they be the ones at fault, for dangerous driving? Usually however it is the car that hits you from behind who is at fault for traveling too close.

Also is there a reason why the OP wrote WHOM is at fault, instead of WHO is at fault? Isn't it WHO is at fault?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4