Road rules1 min ago
who is at fault?
travelling in fast lane of dual carriageway, car in front of me braked and so did i. just started to rain. my car skidded into slow lane and i tried to steer into it, only to spin 180 degrees into fast lane where the car behind hit the front of my car. who is at fault?
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lyndsayp. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
That puts a slightly different perspective on it. If that's the case he is possibly to blame, although I think this may be argued out between insurance companies.
He should have been a travelling safe distance to stop, however normally the car in front slows and continues in a forward direction. If that car slows but comes in effect sideways, then he has a lot less time to react. I will leave this to the discretion of others on the forum.....
Regards
Andy
He should have been a travelling safe distance to stop, however normally the car in front slows and continues in a forward direction. If that car slows but comes in effect sideways, then he has a lot less time to react. I will leave this to the discretion of others on the forum.....
Regards
Andy
I was always taught that you allow yourself enough distance between you and the car in front so that you can brake safely. That distance will change according to speed and weather conditions. Clearly, you didn't do that, or you would have braked safely and avoided skidding in the first place.
As for the car that hit you, I'm afraid I'm in agreement with Andy on all points.
As for the car that hit you, I'm afraid I'm in agreement with Andy on all points.
It is quite clear you were driving at a speed that was unsafe for the conditions and you clearly lost control. spinning back into the overtaking lane and being hit does not exonerate you. It will probably go knock for knock and possibably charges to you foe at the least undue care and attention when the insurance companies investigate.
Yes but if you are travelling along and do an emergency stop and someone goes into the back of you it is still their fault which seems totally unfair so I am not sure that this is any different regardless of the circumstances ?? Technically the person behind still went into the vehicle in front. Tricky one.
It is not true that if a car hits you from behind then it is automatically their fault. This may have been a guide but the highway code states that 'if a car behind you is travelling too close then you should increase the distance between you and the vehicle in front of you'. This effectivally means you must slow down therefore giving you a greater safety margin or stopping distance to your front. It clearly could not be correct that a car could just slam on thier brake diliberatly causing a car to hit them from the rear and then say "your fault you hit me from behind"
With out all the facts this is clearly undue care ant attention if not dangerous (Dangerous is undue care with a knowledge of what you were doing was/is not what a reasonable motorist would do)
With out all the facts this is clearly undue care ant attention if not dangerous (Dangerous is undue care with a knowledge of what you were doing was/is not what a reasonable motorist would do)
We�re straying from the original question a little here, but it is worthwhile to understand the difference between the offences of Dangerous Driving and Careless Driving.
The difference in terms of words is straightforward. I�ve summarised the wording from the Road Traffic Act 1988 which define the offences. Essentially:
- A person is guilty of dangerous driving if the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
- A person is guilty of careless driving if the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
The eagle-eyed among you will notice just one word difference between the two � the use of �far� in the dangerous driving definition.
In practice, the definition is far less clear cut and there is considerable debate at the moment concerning these offences and their maximum sentences. In general, drivers are charged with careless driving if they display a momentary lapse of concentration. To be charged with the higher offence, a sustained episode of inappropriate driving has to be displayed.
The results of the inappropriate driving are not relevant. One can be charged with dangerous driving where no death, injury or even damage occurs. A careless driving charge can be made even if it results in a fatal accident.
This is mainly where the debate is centred. It is widely believed that the lesser charge is often laid inappropriately simply because the higher charge is more difficult to prove.
Sentencing between the two varies considerably. Careless driving carries a maximum fine of �2,500 and is not imprisonable, even if a death results. Dangerous driving carries a maximum penalty of 2 year�s custody.
The circumstances surrounding the incident in this question would indicate that if any charges were to be brought, careless driving would be most likely.
The difference in terms of words is straightforward. I�ve summarised the wording from the Road Traffic Act 1988 which define the offences. Essentially:
- A person is guilty of dangerous driving if the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
- A person is guilty of careless driving if the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
The eagle-eyed among you will notice just one word difference between the two � the use of �far� in the dangerous driving definition.
In practice, the definition is far less clear cut and there is considerable debate at the moment concerning these offences and their maximum sentences. In general, drivers are charged with careless driving if they display a momentary lapse of concentration. To be charged with the higher offence, a sustained episode of inappropriate driving has to be displayed.
The results of the inappropriate driving are not relevant. One can be charged with dangerous driving where no death, injury or even damage occurs. A careless driving charge can be made even if it results in a fatal accident.
This is mainly where the debate is centred. It is widely believed that the lesser charge is often laid inappropriately simply because the higher charge is more difficult to prove.
Sentencing between the two varies considerably. Careless driving carries a maximum fine of �2,500 and is not imprisonable, even if a death results. Dangerous driving carries a maximum penalty of 2 year�s custody.
The circumstances surrounding the incident in this question would indicate that if any charges were to be brought, careless driving would be most likely.
1 to 15 of 15
