Drove into the back of someone

[PIXeL_92]

Hi All,

 

Posting on behalf of my partner, to ask some questions / get opinions.

 

Partner has rear ended someone and trying to work out if she should accept 100% liability or argue with her insurance she wasn't fully at fault,

 

Short points of event.

 

• Ford Fiesta was lead car going past junction
• Audi was at the junction a tiny bit over the give way line but not moving (dash cam shows their wheels stationary leading up to the crash.)
• Ford slammed on brakes to let the Audi out in a live line of traffic with cars in the live line behind it.
• Peugeot (behind the Ford but in front of my partner) has gone from a filter lane into the same lane of my partner forcing her to come off the accelerator to maintain safe distance.)
• Due to it then taking the space in front of my partner it had to slam it's brakes on to avoid the ford that stopped a few seconds after joining the lane.
• Partner then emergency brakes but ABS kicks in buy car keeps sliding going into the back of the Peugeot at around 5-10 MPH shattering the glass boot and pushing her bumper in a little.

 

The police told her that she was 100% at fault and will be prosecuted for lack of due care and attention after making the statement of "we haven't begun to investigate yet," then when she said she needs to get insurance details of all parties involved she was told she was not to speak to any of them under any circumstance and they will get the details. Just to note nobody has sustained injures just body work damage.

 

Would she be able to argue against the lack of due care and attention with a video showing she was maintaining a safe distance and braked as soon as the other one did along with a witness statement from the car behind her confirming this.

 

Then the last question is there any civil action that could be taken against the car that slammed their brakes on in a live lane becoming an obstruction to let a stationary car out of a junction despite not having right of way.

 

Thanks

 

[Kyosanto]

Disclaimer: I'm not a specialist and this my opinion based on what I remember from driving school ages ago:

 

100% at fault as default for rear-ending, since you need to keep enough distance with the car in front so that you can stop in time if it slams the brakes, for whatever reason.

 

 

Quote

 with a video showing she was maintaining a safe distance and braked as soon as the other one did

 

I'm sorry but the fact that she rear ended the car proves that it was not safe distance.

IIRC the only time where you're not 100% at fault when rear ending is when the person in front of you brakes with malicious intent, ie to cause an accident, so, not to let someone in traffic.

 

 

[PIXeL_92]

I was having a look into this 100% at fault thing and there have been cases where the end vehicle whilst still being liable, liability being reduced anywhere from 100% to after providing footage 60-80% due action's of the vehicle infront where it hasn't been malicious. 

 

Going off of a still of the video as the car infront braked and she started to slow down she was just less than a car and a half in width away, and about two lengths before the car infront cut into her lane, it's the car sliding on whilst wheels have locked that did it unfortunately. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by PIXeL_92
Grammer.

[dx100uk]

2 hours ago, PIXeL_92 said:

• Peugeot (behind the Ford but in front of my partner) has gone from a filter lane into the same lane of my partner forcing her to come off the accelerator to maintain safe distance.)
• Due to it then taking the space in front of my partner it had to slam it's brakes on to avoid the ford that stopped a few seconds after joining the lane.

 

a.n.other drive crossed a land to be in the same lane as the OP's OH, thus removing the OP's OH's safe braking distance.

 

the critical part here is the timing of each stage.

 

the video evidence is everything here.

 

if the Peugeot moved because they didnt look and see the audi/ford situation....IMHO there is room to dispute this.

 

have the police requested and LOOKED at her dashcam footage??

 

dx

 

 

 

[PIXeL_92]

They have requested it. I'm going to get it off the SD Card this morning and forward it too them as my partner recorded the screen of it replaying at first. 

 

The police have now forwarded all the details of all drivers involved on and looking at the front CCTV cameras last night, someone has come onto my property and started poking at parts on the front of my partners car and you can hear a snapping noise in the audio whilst they have been doing something to the front of it.

 

When the sun comes up going to see what's gone on. 

[unclebulgaria67]

Not sure what the point of trying to negotiate 50%, 60%, 70% etc responsibilities would be.*

 

If each party in the accident was Insuring their own vehicle, then yes I could see the point. But as Insurance companies will be involved, they won't mess around with percentages of fault in an accident like this. Maybe they would if it were 3 very expensive vehicles. But for a 3 vehicle accident like this, they will look at available evidence to determine the primary cause of the accident. Was it the last vehicle driver in the chain of vehicles that caused the accident or was it the Peugeot driver driving carelessly being at fault ?

 

Most likely outcome is last vehicle driver in the chain being 100% liable, as they may be seen as driving too fast for the road conditions, should have anticipated vehicles filtering in to the one lane and if they had been driving more cautiously, they would have had safe braking distance.

 

Yes some accidents do have 50/50 outcomes, but whatever percentage of fault, it is still a fault accident on a person's Insurance record.

 

*percentages of fault could come into uninsured loss recovery legal claims. But again it still comes down to deciding whose driving was to blame the accident. 

[Kyosanto]

I actually learned something new here. When I was young I rear ended someone who had abruptly stopped in the middle of the road to cross a double white line, and I never questioned my responsibility 

Thanks all!

[PIXeL_92]

Never having to make a claim before we weren't sure if % of liability would decrease now increased premiums for her. 

 

The main thing she is worried about is getting prosecuted, she has managed to take a 3 minute clip off the dash cam and forward it to the police to back up her version of events.

 

The whole whole 3 minutes up to the point of impact shows her driving with care and attention, maintaining safe distances and adjusting speed for the car that cut in front from the filter lane at speed. 

 

She is going to take it to the garage to have the bumper taken off to see if its caused any frame issues / radiator damage and at the same time get them to check the brakes as she is addiment that the car kept going after emergency braking and the ABS kicking in despite only going (according to the dash cam) 19 MPH.

 

It is what it is at this point the main thing is no one was hurt. 

[PIXeL_92]

So it's all being dealt with via the insurance however we think one of the parties (one at the front that got tapped by the middle car) is claiming for way more damage than they actually received. 

 

The problem is because the tac ops said to my partner don't speak or approach the other parties as its an investigation they wouldn't let her take pictures but said they would. 

 

We have asked for these pictures but they said they aren't in a position to provide them, can we request these legally?

 

The police also mass emailed all involved with everyone's car details and home addresses, I did go to the address to get pictures of the damage and some of what they are claiming for is not present on the rear of the car. Would these be enough evidence to prove they are making a false claim or because of the large gap of time could they say they have already had some repair work done? 

[unclebulgaria67]

Anyone making claim would have to evidence accident damage.

 

Let the Insurance companies deal with this. Don't try to play detective. It won't help.

[Anawilliam850]

Hi! 

Based on the events you described,

it seems that your partner may have a case for arguing that she wasn't fully at fault.

 

The fact that she was maintaining a safe distance and immediately braked when the car in front of her did supports this argument. Additionally, if there is a witness who can corroborate this, that would be helpful.

 

Regarding the police report, it's important to note that the police report is not necessarily the final determination of fault. Insurance companies will conduct their own investigations and make their own determinations of fault based on the evidence presented.

 

As for civil action against the car that slammed on its brakes, that may be a possibility, but it would depend on the specific circumstances and any relevant laws in your area. It's possible that the car could be found liable for causing an obstruction in a live lane, but this would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

 

In any case, it's important for your partner to speak with her insurance company and provide them with all the relevant information and evidence. The insurance company will make a determination of fault and handle any claims or legal action as necessary.

[PIXeL_92]

@unclebulgaria67 - Shall do, she is just waiting to see if anything comes through the letter box.

 

@Anawilliam850 - The driver behind my partner made a statement (even though she wasn't involved technically) to the police that stated that my partner braked and the car kept going as she was able to react to her brake lights and reduction in speed in plenty of time to not go into the back of her and leave enough of a gap too.

[Anawilliam850]

Based on the information provided,

 

it seems that your partner may have some arguments to make against being 100% at fault for the collision.

 

The fact that the Ford slammed on its brakes to let the Audi out and that the Peugeot forced your partner to come off the accelerator could be seen as contributing factors to the collision.

 

However, it will ultimately be up to your partner's insurance company and the police to determine fault based on the available evidence, including any video and witness statements.

 

Regarding civil action against the Ford for becoming an obstruction in a live lane,

 

it may be possible to make a claim for contributory negligence if it can be shown that their actions contributed to the collision.

 

However, this would likely depend on the specific circumstances and would need to be evaluated by a legal professional.

 

It's important for your partner to fully cooperate with their insurance company and provide all available evidence to support their case.

 

If they disagree with the determination of fault, they may be able to appeal the decision or seek legal advice.