accident laws

[acornsage]

I was recentley involved in an accident where I skidded into the back of the car in front. When we'd pulled over the other driver admitted It was his fault and he shouldn't have breaked for 'something running in front of his car' I realise I am at fault as I went into the back of him, but are there any laws on not breaking for animals on an A road?

[Bmw-Rider]

i was always under the impression that the peson "from the rear" the hitter is usually always at fault !!

[ugly_bob]

'fraid so. It's your fault for not leaving sufficient distance between you and the car in front. Don't think there's anything about not breaking for animals anywhere - although deer do have the right of way on the roads.
If you hit a dog, you have to stop and attempt to find the owner and inform them, whereas for a cat, you don't. They're calssed as vermin for this purpose.

[Loosehead]

You hit them up the rear end then it's your fault regardless of what they stopped for, even if they think it's their fault.

To correct ugly bob, there is no such thing as "right of way", it is not even mentioned in the highway code, instead there are certain situations when a road user should "Give way". Therefore an animal cannot be credited with having "right of way" or even the awareness to "Give way".

There are rules when you should brake for an animal, I'm not sure of the exect specification but for example you should brake for: Dogs, Deer, Horses, cows, sheep etc you should not brake for: Cats, squirrels, other rodents, birds. Not sure about foxes. However braking or not does not remove the onus on following vehicles to leave a safe distance.

Now technically you don't have to brake for Rhino but I recommend that you probably should!

[ugly_bob]

yhe 'right of way' I was referring to was a (probably defunct) law stating that deer had priority on roads, and you could be prosecuted for hitting or injuring one (pre cars) - no doubt something to do with some King or other enjoying hunting them

[Bmw-Rider]

consider this: the deer is the uk�s largest wild land mammal, they are somewhat large (and heavy) and make a hell of a mess of a vehicles front (i dont mean blood and guts) my colleague was lucky to survive an impact with a deer mercedes sprinter van (and these vans are by no means small) the van was written off.

[dusty1]

There are no rules on breaking for animals on any road, but if he admitted liability, ie: sorry mate its my fault then you should have written that down and got him to sign it, then in the laws eyes he has admitted liability and his insurance has no option but to pay you out. Just another little tip if you have an accident and you are perfectly sure its the other chaps fault, hit the back of your hand fairly hard on the steering wheel or somewhere, you then are hurt
( bruised) and the police have to come out they then are your witnesses, beware they will prosicute whoever is at fault.

[claguey]

Dusty, you're wrong. Just because someone admits liability at the scene does not mean the insurers have to accept liability. They make their own enquiries and will make a decision based on that, but you run in the back of someone then yo are at fault as you were driving too close and had no safe stopping distance. Bit concerned about your advice to feign injury sounds like perverting the course of justice to me...

[dusty1]

Claguey, Thats why I said make sure you are not at fault then the law is on your side, you are not perverting the course of justice at all, what you are doing is getting reliable witnesses, i.e: the police and I got advised to do this by guess who need I say more, although he did say I never told you that

[testmonkey]

Yep, no laws on braking / not braking but the admittance of liability is an interesting point. The insurance companies will make there own final judgment and normally in a case like this it would be pretty clear cut. dusty1 is right in saying that you should have got the other driver to sign an admittance of fault at the scene if they were so inclined. Your insurance company would certainly use such evidence to attempt to reduce the blame factor from 100% to possibly a 50/50 situation.

You should never admit responsibility at the scene of an accident under any circumstances and your insurance company may even have specific advise to this effect. Read the small print of your policy and you may be surprised by what you find.

[Golf38]

There is certainly no "requirement" in law to brake to avoid an animal, but the vast vast majority do, either as a reflex or owing to a love for the fluffy little darlings.

If someone hits the breaks for an animal and someone runs into the back of them then its going to be thye following vehicle at fault I'm afraid. If you can trace the owner of the animal then there may be recourse for ciovil action against them.


Just as an aside, you have to stop and report a collision involving cattle, horses, ass, mules, pigs, sheep, dogs and goats as long as the animal injured isn't in or on one of the vehicles involved.