PDA

View Full Version : Is the blanket rule that you're at fault if you hit the back of a car stupid?



rainbow road
30-05-2010, 14:30
I can think of several scenarios where it would not be your fault but if you hit the back of someone car, it's always your fault.

That irritates me! Agreed or nay?

headoverfeet
30-05-2010, 14:33
AFAIK :yes: you should always have a safe stopping distance in front of you.

When would you not be at fault for not having a safe stopping distance?

MimiGrace
30-05-2010, 14:33
its never really bothered me that much - it worries me in city driving sometimes (but i dislike city driving anyway), and always reassures me, cause *i'm* not the one tailgating

so they're the ones who have to freak when i slam my breaks cause they're too close :p

i am struggling to think of a scenario where it wouldn't be the person in the backs fault? maybe i'm just unimaginative though?

Guest1234
30-05-2010, 14:36
They will always investigate it.
My brother got rear ended but the fault was deemed to be the person who was in front of my brother, who stopped suddenly, my brother stopped suddenly missing the first person by centimeters and the person behind my brother hit him, and pushed my brother into the car in front and then another 20m forward.
Though generally speaking it is the rule, but they will investigate it and find out the real reason.

BarefootedMumma
30-05-2010, 14:36
Yes Cause you should be keeping a Safe distance (Think the 3 second rule) behind.

However having said that, I have a friend who used to stop Absurdly away from the car infront at lights (I am talking 2-3Mtrs MIN). Anyway he was the meat in a sandwhich once and there were mark on the road showing he was actually stopped about 3.5 mtrs away from the car infront when the guy behind him Flew up his rear. as ther was proof he was Beyond a safe distance away from the car infront the guy behind had to pay for repairs to all 3 vehicles.

Oh and BTW I have known people who wher reveresedinto being at fault again for not giving a Safe distance (never mind the fact the person infrom was reversing away from a red light.)

Shh
30-05-2010, 14:36
It isn't *always* the person in the car behind's fault. It is just a presumption they are at fault due to the factors mentioned by the PP.

An example where it would be the front car's fault: if they suddenly put the car into reverse and accelerated.

MsMummy
30-05-2010, 14:38
Is it a blanket rule, or a presumption? I don't know. I've never had cause to look into it. But I think you have a tough time convincing the insurers that you're not at fault if you hit somebody from behind.

Anyway, I've encountered two instances where (if the person behind is to be believed) that it should have been the person in front's fault:

- person behind claimed that person in front deliberately slammed on brakes on 100km/h highway

- person behind claimed that person in front reversed back into them at a traffic light

Guest1234
30-05-2010, 14:38
Thought I would add that the person in front stopped suddenly for no reason, he just stopped at a green light, thinking it was about to go yellow, and who was also drugged out of his mind.

Shh
30-05-2010, 14:41
I think it would also be the person in front's fault if they pulled out into a lane (on the freeway etc) without looking or indicating and there was no time for the person behind to stop.

Emmi
30-05-2010, 14:43
I dont think it's stupid. You should always keep a safe stopping distance.
Also I've often wondered about the ocassion where it's a 3 car pile up. If it can be proved that the middle person had left enough room between them and the car in front, does the person at the end (the 3rd person) have to pay up?
I got rear ended when I'd only have my p's for 6 months by a range rover, I was in a for laser hatch, at 90kms/hour! The guy tried to blame me for not indicating... Hmm, yes, right. He should have been watching what he was doing, seen my brake light (had one in the top ofthe rear window too) an not sitting so damn close! Needless to say the car was a write-off :(

BarefootedMumma
30-05-2010, 14:44
Sorry miss read it as Is it a blaket rule.

Is it strupid.. I dunno, Maybe.

I had a guy pull over in a oneway street & looked like he had parked his car, so I indicated from beind him & went to continue through the street. He chucked a Utrun. I was at fault for overtaking in a side street (or something just as Absurd) But he was booked. This apprently meant nothing to our insurers.

London
30-05-2010, 14:48
My DP crashed his work truck 3 weeks ago at a set of lights on a hill.
Car broken down in the right hand lane. Car A (in left lane) slammed brakes on going through a green light, for no apparent reason. Car B jammed their brakes on and hit Car A. My DP slammed his truck brakes on...couldnt swerve into right hand lane because of the broken down car, and couldnt swerve to the left due to a police man standing on that side of road. Truck smashed into back of Car B. DPs boss must pay for Car A and Car B and the Truck.
Even though the police man was standing right there and saw the entire incident, his words to my DP were 'too bad, your the last car, your at fault'.

So no, its not always a fair rule ESPECIALLY when there are people witnessing it.

Travdan
30-05-2010, 14:49
We nearly ended up running into the back end of someone, only because their brakelights weren't working and there was no way for us to tell that they were actually slowing down. We were keeping a safe distance (in an 80km zone) but by the time we realised they were slowing it was nearly to late. I think that driver should be at fault if we ran into the back of him.

Ffrenchknickers
30-05-2010, 14:52
Thought I would add that the person in front stopped suddenly for no reason, he just stopped at a green light, thinking it was about to go yellow, and who was also drugged out of his mind.

The only time I have had an accident was a similar scenario to yours....it was an old man who slammed on his brakes at a green light. It was still my fault though, and rightly so as I obviously didn't leave enough room for the unexpected, or I wasn't paying attention.

delirium
30-05-2010, 15:32
The presumption is that even if someone slams on their brakes you should be a safe distance from them to pull up in time. But there are variables that can change it. DH was doing 80 on a causeway in the city and it was pouring rain. He was a safe distance behind the guy in front of him. The lights turned orange for the other guy and he hit the brakes instead of going thru. DH hit the brakes and only tapped the guy (a slight dent to us, a tiny tiny scape for him) but without the rain he would of pulled up no worries.

Legally though I always thought the person behind was always in the wrong by virtue of the fact you should be giving room to begin with.

1+1=5
30-05-2010, 15:38
Thought I would add that the person in front stopped suddenly for no reason, he just stopped at a green light, thinking it was about to go yellow, and who was also drugged out of his mind.

this happened to DH as well. the guy was speeding through a light, realised there was a camera there and slammed his breaks on. DH rear-ended him but we ended up paying for the repairs. I think the guy was nervous because he was driving a rental so if he was to be booked, he owuld have to pay all sorts of other fees as well. the guy did a stupid thing but i keep telling DH to expect people to do stupid things and back off :rolleyes:

Benji
30-05-2010, 15:38
I was driving at 100ks on a drive from Adelaide to Sydney last year and a truck had crashed onto its side *just* around a blind corner. I came so, so, so, so close to hitting a car that had stopped just in front of it it's not funny. There's no way in hell that would've been my fault OR the other car's fault. That was entirely a result of the truck lying in the middle of the road. I was just thanking my lucky stars everyone was okay!!!

Sheer Bliss
30-05-2010, 16:55
:yes: It's a bit of a PITA, but someone has to be to blame - lol.

DH rear-ended another car, and was deemed to be at fault. He was car C. A, B & C stopped at red light, light goes green. All take-off (in LH lane of 2 lanes) then A puts on brakes suddenly. DH is checking blind spot and indicating to change lanes (as he had to take the next RH turn) at this moment. Car B brakes in time to miss A, but as DH was checking his blind spot, notices too late and hits B. Car A drives off, oblivious to what has happened. Technically it was his fault as there mustn't have been a safe gap, but the fact that he was doing the right thing checking blind spot matters not. PITA! But in reality car B wasn't to blame at all (car A caused the accident) so they shouldnt' be the one held accountable.

Pax
30-05-2010, 17:27
No it makes sense.. dont tail gate and if you are in traffic that is so close together dont drive so fast.

florence
30-05-2010, 17:32
You will always be deemed at fault unless you are pushed into the back of someone by another car or there is some really, really extenuating circumstances. In all my years in insurance the car that rear ended the other car was always at fault unless pushed by another car (and I was in investigations).

Lemonhead
30-05-2010, 17:32
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:o

Pax
30-05-2010, 17:36
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:o


Its so dangerous.. I could give you a real lecture right now :shame:

but instead why dont i just give you some images of dead people in car accidents :crying:

please dont risk your life or your kids or others.

trust me when i saw my daughter in ICU with small chance of survival.. it was something that will never ever leave my memory.

cars kill and maim bad.

Lemonhead
30-05-2010, 17:41
Its so dangerous.. I could give you a real lecture right now :shame:

but instead why dont i just give you some images of dead people in car accidents :crying:

please dont risk your life or your kids or others.

trust me when i saw my daughter in ICU with small chance of survival.. it was something that will never ever leave my memory.

cars kill and maim bad.

Yeah, I know. But I do the speed limit...They dont, they are dangerous. I usually keep calm and just try and overtake where its safe but seriously doing 60km in a 90km zone is FRUSTRATING and I feel better calling them a mother f***er :D as I drive past.

Ive seen plenty of dead people, I live with "if its my time, its my time" :yes:.

Pax
30-05-2010, 17:43
Ive seen plenty of dead people, I live with "if its my time, its my time" :yes:.

Yeah but you could take other people with you, like my daughter nearly was.

:no:

headoverfeet
30-05-2010, 17:44
I thought it was illegal to go more then 20kmph below the speed limit?

Lemonhead
30-05-2010, 17:45
Yeah but you could take other people with you, like my daughter nearly was.

:no:

I dont drive like that.
Im talking when I drive in my normal little way and I come up behind some 400 year old man or someone who can barely see over the steering wheel and I am stuck doing 30km under the speed limit because THEY are a hazard and shouldnt be allowed to drive. Thats when I get peeved. Normal everyday driving, I am a saint :cloud9:.

Pax
30-05-2010, 17:47
I dont drive like that.
Im talking when I drive in my normal little way and I come up behind some 400 year old man or someone who can barely see over the steering wheel and I am stuck doing 30km under the speed limit because THEY are a hazard and shouldnt be allowed to drive. Thats when I get peeved. Normal everyday driving, I am a saint :cloud9:.

Oh my god now i am harping.. look you made me harp :shame:

Yeah BUt...

screaming abuse/road raging at people causes bad stuff to happen too.

be nice to old people you will be old one day you know...

Shh
30-05-2010, 18:03
I know what you mean, Bek, drivers going way under the limit, with slow response times and are over cautious and not confident can definitely be a hazard.

But trust me, even old, mild looking people can be crazy and you don't want to get involved in a road rage incident. I honk if someone does something immediately dangerous but otherwise I get out of their way. I will put my foot down hard to do that if I need to.

Emmi
30-05-2010, 18:12
Slow people should pull over to allow those they are holding up to pass them. It's just courteous.
I guess the same thing goes with running red lights. My new car was t-boned after some stupid cow was speeding and ran a red light, in Sydney, over a month ago (my car is still not repaired, long story). A week and a half later down near a local shopping centre, a man ran a red light, t-boned another car, it flipped and rolled, he got crushed and thrown from it (not wearing his seat belt!) and died in my hands from a massive head injury.
Please wear your seatbelts all the time, no matter what! And don't run red lights! I've now seen what could have happened to me, DH and DD :'(

justmum
30-05-2010, 18:14
There are minimum speed limits on roads too not just maximums so whilst I wouldn't necessarily be tailgating and yelling abuse, I get the frustration RL.

On the main Perth freeways, you cannot go less than 30kms below the limit.

As to the OP, there is a presumption that the car at the back is always to blame. However this presumption can be reversed in certain circumstances. Like if the car in front has non-functioning brake lights or there is more than one car involved in the accident. Then the presumption of blame is reversed onto the other driver and he has to demonstrate he did not cause the accident.

Jennaisme
30-05-2010, 18:14
I'm a slow driver. I always drive late at night and keep to the left side of the road. It's because I'm learning.
Bek, I know you think it makes you feel better, but I've had people like that come out of no where, start abusing the crap out of me, and I tell you, it scares the crap out of me, which makes me even more of a dangerous driver than just driving slowly. It's a really horrible thing to do, if people aren't confident already in their driving to make them feel worse, 'cause you more than likely drove that way when you started out too.

Amara
30-05-2010, 18:18
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:o

Just a friendly reminder that its a speed limit. That means you can't go over it but you can go under it. Tail gating however is against the law.

Lemonhead
30-05-2010, 18:20
Just a friendly reminder that its a speed limit. That means you can't go over it but you can go under it. Tail gating however is against the law.

No, it isnt right to go 30km under the speed limit. If you dont feel comfortable going the required speed limit then dont drive...simple. It creates road rage and a hazard.


I'm a slow driver. I always drive late at night and keep to the left side of the road. It's because I'm learning.
Bek, I know you think it makes you feel better, but I've had people like that come out of no where, start abusing the crap out of me, and I tell you, it scares the crap out of me, which makes me even more of a dangerous driver than just driving slowly. It's a really horrible thing to do, if people aren't confident already in their driving to make them feel worse, 'cause you more than likely drove that way when you started out too.

Id never get annoyed at a learner :no:. I always feel bad for learners who stall at lights nawww.

rainbow road
30-05-2010, 18:20
In my situation, the car 2 cars in front turned left without indicating. Car B slammed on his brakes, car C (me) slammed on my brakes but it was wet so ended up nudging car B. No damage to their car, my car is kind of wonky but fine. But in this situation, I think it was car As fault. If he'd indicated at the appropriate time we all would have been able to slow down instead of halt suddenly.

Add in the rain, and I don't feel responsible- I was keeping the wet weather distance away, 5 seconds, but hey. Car B didn't blame me though, he was really lovely actually. So WDYT in this situation?

ETA I know with insurance it's always the backers fault. Though if this guy claims (he said he won't unless his dad makes him) he's waiting till Thursday, my bday, when my excess drops $200.

Amara
30-05-2010, 18:21
I used to work in insurance and the one at the back was always blamed and anyone backing was always at fault.

Phyllis Stein
30-05-2010, 18:34
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...
If someone does that to me, I take their rego and report them. :)


Yeah, I know. But I do the speed limit...They dont, they are dangerous.

Your response to them is far more dangerous that what they're doing.


I thought it was illegal to go more then 20kmph below the speed limit?

I've just done some looking and I couldn't find any laws regulating slower drivers. What I did find from Victoria was this (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/rsc/demerit/demerit5.htm#RTFToC3).



The Marysville and District Tourist and Progress Association submission raised the issue of slow drivers not pulling over to allow others to pass. The Association suggested:

'Pull overs' with appropriate signage to inform drivers, when there are, say four cars behind them, they are obliged to pull over, at the next designated 'pull over' spot, with the added deterrent of demerit points, if drivers did not obey the sign directives. [12] (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/rsc/demerit/demfoot5.htm)

At the public hearings the Victoria Police were asked whether they had ever contemplated a new offence to deal with slow traffic. Assistant Commissioner Green replied that there was a brief for impeding traffic but a problem with many traffic laws was that they required subjective judgement. [13] (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/rsc/demerit/demfoot5.htm)

No other State includes such offences nor was there any reference to such offences in known overseas schemes. Legislation would only be of value if there were 'pull overs' for drivers to use. Road authorities are constructing passing lanes on major rural roads and eventually shorter 'pull overs' are possible on the more hilly and mountainous roads.

The Committee decided that whilst there were some problems the solution did not lie in including a slow driver offence in the demerit points scheme. However, the Committee acknowledges there is a safety issue which needs to be addressed by VicRoads and the Victorian Police.


I don't rely on speed limits to tell me how fast to drive - I drive to conditions, including other traffic, number of pedestrians or cyclists, weather, road surface, visibility and time of day, and the like. Insisting on doing the speed limit at all times is just plain silly and marks someone in my mind as an inexperienced driver.

Amara
30-05-2010, 18:48
Thanks Phyllis I didn't think we had such a rule in vic. I certainly had not heard of it in my 25 year driving history. Omg I am old I have been driving longer than many on this forum have been alive.

Phyllis Stein
30-05-2010, 18:52
Thanks Phyllis I didn't think we had such a rule in vic. I certainly had not heard of it in my 25 year driving history. Omg I am old I have been driving longer than many on this forum have been alive.

You make me feel like a relative novice, with only 15 years experience! :D

Amara
30-05-2010, 18:53
In my situation, the car 2 cars in front turned left without indicating. Car B slammed on his brakes, car C (me) slammed on my brakes but it was wet so ended up nudging car B. No damage to their car, my car is kind of wonky but fine. But in this situation, I think it was car As fault. If he'd indicated at the appropriate time we all would have been able to slow down instead of halt suddenly.

Add in the rain, and I don't feel responsible- I was keeping the wet weather distance away, 5 seconds, but hey. Car B didn't blame me though, he was really lovely actually. So WDYT in this situation?

ETA I know with insurance it's always the backers fault. Though if this guy claims (he said he won't unless his dad makes him) he's waiting till Thursday, my bday, when my excess drops $200.

Logically it should be the driver who did not indicate that is at fault but that is usually hard to prove. Even if you could prove it they would probably say its your fault as you were in the rear and did not leave enough distance to stop in rain. Insurance is often not fair.

rainbow road
30-05-2010, 18:59
Logically it should be the driver who did not indicate that is at fault but that is usually hard to prove. Even if you could prove it they would probably say its your fault as you were in the rear and did not leave enough distance to stop in rain. Insurance is often not fair.
oh I know, I would never win with insurance, being young and all. Just curious to see other peoples perspectives, because I just don't think anything is black and white and such rules can be really unfair but ya live and learn etc

Areca
30-05-2010, 19:12
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:o

Did you know that some people have restrictions on their license that prevent them to drive over a certain speed limit? Often it's at 50 or 60kms so no matter the speed limit, they can't drive above their set speed limit.

Azurial
30-05-2010, 19:15
If you reverse out of a drive way and some one hits you, whose fault is it?

Mischief
30-05-2010, 19:17
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:o
Please think about those actions.... Thats totally unsafe not just for YOU, but for the person you do it too. How would you feel if your actions cause the loss of life? Personally, if someone acting like that in a car causes an accident where someone is injured or killed I (PERSONALLY) believe they should do jail time for grievous bodily harm, or manslaughter.

People have lots of different reasons for driving below the limit. One day you might find that you have one of those reasons.... will you happily hand in your license and rely on others to drive you from A - B?

The other thing.... sometimes people slow down so you can PASS them, not just to be a pain.

IndigoJ
30-05-2010, 19:18
If you reverse out of a drive way and some one hits you, whose fault is it?

Yours.


I havent read all the post but i think if you pull out of a car space and a car hits you in the back then you are at fault.

Mischief
30-05-2010, 19:20
As for the person behind being at fault. In the average car accident on a highway... YES. You should always leave enough time to stop.

If someone pulls into your space because they are a tool.... just take a breath and lapse back again to put in the 3 second rule again.

BTW... you should double it when its raining, or your vision is impaired.

Sheer Bliss
30-05-2010, 19:53
If you reverse out of a drive way and some one hits you, whose fault is it?

When entering or exiting private property ie a driveway - you must always give-way to traffic already on the road, so if you are backing out - you must give way. If they hit you it's because you didn't give way to them. (Unless they were leaving private property too, and you were on the road before them I guess)

aje001
30-05-2010, 22:10
It's not a blanket rule. You will be considered at fault if you have broken the road rules. Whether that means "Follow too close", "Fail to control vehicle", "Unsafe lane change", etc. In my work as a police officer I've given people involved in crashes tickets for all these things - and some of those were the car in front. It all depends on the circumstances

NonnyMouse
30-05-2010, 22:18
I had someone reverse into me and I had to prove that not only was I stationary at the time, but that I had also stopped a suitable distance behind them, and that I had definitely NOT driven into his car. Then he tried to accuse me of being drunk at the wheel! (Note to self, if you have a car crash the day after your birthday, don't tell the other driver you were out celebrating the night before, even if he seems really apologetic and friendly).

I stopped at an intersection behind a car, he took off to make a right turn, then saw a truck coming, so reversed right back into me! I hadn't even started to move up yet, so he could have just reversed back to his original starting point, but he kept going and caused $3,000 damage to my car.

Luckily I had called the insurer the instant it happened, gave them the details of the accident including that fact that I had had my last drink over 12 hours earlier, backed it up with a statdec from my client (a lawyer! LOL) to prove that I had been at his office all day until 5 mins before the crash and had shown no sign at all of having had any alcohol recently. They refused to give his story credibility and I got the repairs fully covered with no excess payment needed and no loss of "no claims bonus".

Basil
30-05-2010, 22:44
I think you should always drive to avoid an accident. Man, living on the Gold Coast, you have to have your wits about you. Such impatient, arrogant drivers and lots of rearenders.

DH ran up the back of a car because she didn't go on the green light - absolutely his fault, he should have seen she wasn't moving!

SorenLorensen
30-05-2010, 23:11
i thought it was more of a general rule with exceptions.
if someone did something stupid on the road causing you to hit them then i would hope they would be fined for driving recklessly.

i know someone who has been hit in the rear and was charged as at fault. something about obstructing traffic and something...i dont know, but i was on my L's at the time and i remember it becuase i had always though if someone rear ended you they were at fault and it made me go 'ahhhhh, well there you go'


i had someone stop suddenly behind me late last year (i was already stopped in a line of traffic), she stopped just in time but the bloke behind her didnt....he was at fault for her damage and mine (he pushed her into me).

florence
31-05-2010, 10:29
I was driving at 100ks on a drive from Adelaide to Sydney last year and a truck had crashed onto its side *just* around a blind corner. I came so, so, so, so close to hitting a car that had stopped just in front of it it's not funny. There's no way in hell that would've been my fault OR the other car's fault. That was entirely a result of the truck lying in the middle of the road. I was just thanking my lucky stars everyone was okay!!!

Yep, technically, you would have been at fault. However, your insurer may have held your excess and if successful in recovering from the 'at fault' third party, they would refund it.

Deserama
31-05-2010, 11:07
If someone does that to me, I take their rego and report them. :)


Your response to them is far more dangerous that what they're doing.



I've just done some looking and I couldn't find any laws regulating slower drivers. What I did find from Victoria was this (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/rsc/demerit/demerit5.htm#RTFToC3).



I don't rely on speed limits to tell me how fast to drive - I drive to conditions, including other traffic, number of pedestrians or cyclists, weather, road surface, visibility and time of day, and the like. Insisting on doing the speed limit at all times is just plain silly and marks someone in my mind as an inexperienced driver.

:yes: I agree. There are no rules against driving under the speed limit.

Besides that, why is everyone so damn impatient??? What's the mad rush? SLOW DOWN!!!!


Did you know that some people have restrictions on their license that prevent them to drive over a certain speed limit? Often it's at 50 or 60kms so no matter the speed limit, they can't drive above their set speed limit.

Exactly, and imagine being one of them and some twit decides to tailgate, honk and throw abuse at you everywhere you go? Nasty!


If you reverse out of a drive way and some one hits you, whose fault is it?

Yours.

~Candy~
31-05-2010, 11:12
It's not a blanket rule. You will be considered at fault if you have broken the road rules. Whether that means "Follow too close", "Fail to control vehicle", "Unsafe lane change", etc. In my work as a police officer I've given people involved in crashes tickets for all these things - and some of those were the car in front. It all depends on the circumstances

:iagree: my dh was in a pile up accident (he was in the middle) and all the drivers were fined for failing to control vehicle.
Hence the rule...allow a 2 car gap between you and the driver infront. When stopped at lights, it's a 1 car gap.

sweetseven
31-05-2010, 11:18
If you reverse out of a drive way and some one hits you, whose fault is it?I've had a police officer tell me that it is technically illegal to reverse out of a driveway, you are supposed to drive forwards out of it.

I have nothing to back this up however, and have never heard mention of it prior or since.

Deserama
31-05-2010, 11:20
Doesn't it say in the learner driver thingie that it's illegal to reverse into oncoming traffic? I'll have to ask dh's dad next time I speak to him, he's a police sargent.

~Candy~
31-05-2010, 11:23
I've had a police officer tell me that it is technically illegal to reverse out of a driveway, you are supposed to drive forwards out of it.

I have nothing to back this up however, and have never heard mention of it prior or since.

True, to reverse into oncomming traffic is illegal. But I do think this is something that should be revised as soo many houses these days are on tiny properties, and those who live on main rd's would find it nearly impossible to reverse into their driveway especially come peak hour.

sweetseven
31-05-2010, 11:26
I only tailgait if someone refuses to do the speed limit :yes: if they slow down even more to annoy me Ill flash my lights, beep my horn and yell abuse...do the damn speed limit or ride a pushbike!! LOL. However, if I crashed into them Id be like goddammit Im an idiot for tailgaiting...:oThere could be myraid reasons for travelling slowly:

* perhaps they just avoided a major accident and want to take it easy until their nerves settle
* perhaps they have delicate cargo and need to insure a gentle ride to protect it
* perhaps their vehicle is playing up and they don't want to overtax the engine

Tailgating to attempt to force someone to speed up often will not work, and if it does the distress caused to the driver would make less safe driving conditions.

Benji
31-05-2010, 11:30
Yep, technically, you would have been at fault. However, your insurer may have held your excess and if successful in recovering from the 'at fault' third party, they would refund it.

I just thank my lucky stars I didn't hit anyone - was driving DP's parents car at the time :eek::laughing:

susieq1969
31-05-2010, 11:35
I was in an accident where the guy reversed out of his space and hit me. I had already driven past him partly and he came out. So the damage to my car started half way down. I had to fight tooth and nail to win. He was adamant that it was my fault even tho clearly he had reversed straight out without looking!

I work for an insurance company too. And yes, it's usually the driver behind who is at fault. Unless evidence can be found that something else happened or was involved.

I HATE tailgaters. :hissy:

Especially when they do it in the wet, OR and this is a biggy, if you're doing the actual speed limit!!!

The amount of time's I've been doing the speed limit or slightly over and had some **** on my backside is unbelievable.

I've even been flashed and honked at when I'm doing the speed limit. :no:

And you know what, they won't look at you when you pull over to let them past. Gutless. :banghead:

My trick if that does happen is to ever so slightly touch the brakes so my lights go on. Makes them back off usually. :yes:

NonnyMouse
31-05-2010, 11:44
I almost rear-ended someone once, and I'm not sure if I would have been at fault or not.

I was travelling a fairly long way behind another car, way more than the 2 - 3 second guildeline, and it was a 70km zone. My first indication that something was amiss was when SMOKE starting pouring off the back of their tyres. No brake lights came on at all! The car had rammed on their brakes to avoid another car that had stopped to turn and they had come to a complete halt.

Despite my safe following distance, the fact that I didn't see brake lights, and was confused by the smoke off their tyres, meant that I didn't manage to come to a halt myself until quite close to the other car (about 2 metres), and had I been looking away for a moment at the time the smoke came out I have no doubt that I would have been part of the accident.

I would hope that those would be considered mitigating crcumstances and enough to absolve me of blame if I had hit them (i.e. no brake lights on the car in front), but I'm not certain.

~Candy~
31-05-2010, 11:49
There could be myraid reasons for travelling slowly:

* perhaps they just avoided a major accident and want to take it easy until their nerves settle
* perhaps they have delicate cargo and need to insure a gentle ride to protect it
* perhaps their vehicle is playing up and they don't want to overtax the engine

Tailgating to attempt to force someone to speed up often will not work, and if it does the distress caused to the driver would make less safe driving conditions.

:iagree: I hate it when you do have delicate cargo and you have to take the corners extra carefully and slowly...ppl behind simply sit up your butt and try to push you :banghead:
Tailgaters can sit behind me and seethe all they like...idiots!

TaraR
31-05-2010, 12:20
I think that there are a few instances where its not the person at the backs fault but gerenally if your too close, wether your tailgating or not then it's your fault.
And I agree that if you want to sit on 50 then go down the back streets.
I just sat my motorbike L's and found out it is just as illegal to sit 20ks under as it is to sit 10ks over, and you will get a fine and loose demerits because you are being a hazard.

CocktailBubba
31-05-2010, 13:17
I almost rear-ended someone once, and I'm not sure if I would have been at fault or not.

I was travelling a fairly long way behind another car, way more than the 2 - 3
second guildeline, and it was a 70km zone. My first indication that something was amiss was when SMOKE starting pouring off the
back of their tyres. No brake lights came on at all! The car had rammed on their brakes to avoid another car that had stopped to turn and they had come to a complete halt.

Despite my safe following distance, the fact that I didn't see brake lights, and was confused by the smoke off their tyres,
meant that I didn't manage to come to a halt myself until quite close to the other car (about 2 metres), and had I been looking away for a moment at the time the smoke
came out I have no doubt that I would have been part of the accident.

I would hope that those would be
considered mitigating crcumstances and enough to absolve me of blame if I had hit them (i.e. no brake lights on the car in front), but I'm not certain.

A car is not roadworthy if it's break lights aren't working so u would not have been at fault and that car should have e en been on the road... Had it been a coppa behind him and not you he would have gotten a canary, a hefty fine and a couple of weeks to have them fixed, checked out by a mechanic and then go to Vic roads to get his road worthy back.

Having no breaks lights is so friggen dangerous.

florence
31-05-2010, 14:45
My trick if that does happen is to ever so slightly touch the brakes so my lights go on. Makes them back off usually. :yes:

I usually do this but twice have been chased and terrorised to the point I was really, really frightened.
Once, I even had my baby in the car. This mental case decided to drive so close, he was almost touching me and he was in a huge 4WD. Luckily, there was a police car on the motorway, so I pulled in behind him and followed him and the idiot backed off and drove away.
Never again :no:

florence
31-05-2010, 14:50
A car is not roadworthy if it's break lights aren't working so u would not have been at fault and that car should have e en been on the road... Had it been a coppa behind him and not you he would have gotten a canary, a hefty fine and a couple of weeks to have them fixed, checked out by a mechanic and then go to Vic roads to get his road worthy back.

Having no breaks lights is so friggen dangerous.


Yes, the car wasn't roadworthy and had the police attended, they would have fined him and given him a defect notice but the rear car would have been at fault (unless pushed by another car).
If there had been an independent witness then maybe (and only maybe) the insurer might have waived the excess but more than likely they would have held the excess and sent it off to recoveries. If the insurer was successful in their recovery from the third party they would then refund the excess. I used to work in recoveries, too :D

xmizzyx
31-05-2010, 23:20
My 1st accident, I was on my Ls, I was rear ended, I paid for it. I don't get it?
I also have a massive loathing for tailgaiters. I can guarantee every single day that I drive on the road someone sits fair up my azz, it soooooo gets to me... I drive a pretty hot car so people think I'm gonna drive fast or drive stupidly or something I dunno but I am soooooooooo sick of it. I was hit up the backside because I GAVE WAY AT A ROUNDABOUT!!! The mongrel hit the car behind me who then hit me then he took off so I'm still stuck with a damaged rear end 2 years later. Not happy Jan!!
People just need to learn how to drive. Dunno how most of them get and keep their licenses.

florence
01-06-2010, 07:30
My 1st accident, I was on my Ls, I was rear ended, I paid for it. I don't get it?
I also have a massive loathing for tailgaiters. I can guarantee every single day that I drive on the road someone sits fair up my azz, it soooooo gets to me... I drive a pretty hot car so people think I'm gonna drive fast or drive stupidly or something I dunno but I am soooooooooo sick of it. I was hit up the backside because I GAVE WAY AT A ROUNDABOUT!!! The mongrel hit the car behind me who then hit me then he took off so I'm still stuck with a damaged rear end 2 years later. Not happy Jan!!
People just need to learn how to drive. Dunno how most of them get and keep their licenses.

If your first accident is what you are also referring to at the end of your post then the reason you would have to pay for your damage. This is because the responsible party left the scene and if there is no at fault third party to recover from (ie you didn't get any or enough details) then you will need to pay your excess to have your car fixed or pay for the damage if you only have third party property damage insurance and aren't comprehensively insured.

xmizzyx
02-06-2010, 00:18
Nah my 1st accident when I was 17 (16 yrs ago). The guy hit my car and took off about 2 years ago and I can't afford to fix it and couldn't afford comprehensive insurance at the time either. So I'm stuck with a cracked bumper and ding in the back for a while.

susieq1969
02-06-2010, 08:04
Nah my 1st accident when I was 17 (16 yrs ago). The guy hit my car and took off about 2 years ago and I can't afford to fix it and couldn't afford comprehensive insurance at the time either. So I'm stuck with a cracked bumper and ding in the back for a while.

We're talking about if you're hit in the rear then the person who hit you is responsible.

Unfortunately, in your case because the TP took off, your insurance company would be unable to claim any expenses back.


Which is why you couldn't get your car fixed.

However, the TP is still at fault for hitting you. IT's just unfortunate that they did a runner