• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

rear ending someone, is it always ur fault?

DontEvenTrip said:
is it always ur fault even if the person u rear ended was likely tailgating someone and u weren't but still couldnt stop in time to avoid hittin them?
Click to expand...

my son hit a car in a parking lot that was backing up. Geico gave us a hard time initially, and claimed we were automatically at fault but when our insurance got involved, Geico dropped it. The woman (yes, she was asian) had two similar accidents that same morning.
 
At least two second following distance whether you can see through their windows or not. It's pretty close to one yard per mph. My rule of thumb is that if I can easily read a license plate at 65mph I'm too close.

And anyone who tells you that cars will merge in front of you constantly doesn't know what they're talking about. I leave a 2 second gap on 101 in rush traffic all the time and people rarely get in front. If they do, I just drop back more. Probably changes when I get home by about 20 seconds over a half hour commute.
 
AbsolutEnduser said:
Actually the OP has a good point and I hope someday this is a precedent for banning all tinted rear-windows. It's that way in Germany for example. And for a reason
Click to expand...

And what of trucks or SUVs with cargo? Will they ban filling the back of your SUV to the point where people can't see through you? Or shells on the back of pickups? Or shorter cars following taller SUVs? Or dirty rear windows in snowy areas?

This is a ridiculous law. There should be no requirement to be able to see through the car in front of you. Do you have any links to further information about this law in Germany?

You should be driving in such a way that if the car in front of you were to stop at it's maximum braking, you have enough time to react and stop similarly. This is often MUCH more than people actually follow.

FWIW, I'm a chronic tailgater.
 
If YOU hit somebody from behind (unless YOU were rear-ended yourself & that drove you forward) then it's pretty much gonna be your fault. Think about it - what if YOU were hit from behind and the hitter says "oh, he stopped too fast.." - You alone are responsible for the control of your own vehicle, sorry.

I had a strange situation awhile back - an off-ramp where the sign says "Right lane, RIght turn after stop" because the lane JOINS another road as an additional lane - you stop to make sure the crosswalk is clear and then you GO - no merging - around a 90-degree turn. It's a route I take regularly.

One day I pull up behind a minivan which has stopped, then it goes. I stop, look left up the cross walk and pull out, and DRILL the minivan that stopped 20 feet up curve to check for traffic in thier own dedicated lane. Yep, my fault for not LOOKING WHERE THE FUCK I was going -even though they had no reason to stop, and had stopped in a clear lane on a blind corner.

Don't do that. (either one of those dumb-ass moves)
 
HellFyre said:
And what of trucks or SUVs with cargo? Will they ban filling the back of your SUV to the point where people can't see through you? Or shells on the back of pickups? Or shorter cars following taller SUVs? Or dirty rear windows in snowy areas?
Click to expand...

This doesn't mean a soccer mom-mobile should have limo-black rear window tinting. Every little bit helps. Make it so trucks' rear windows can't be any darker than a car's. That doesn't mean there won't still be rolling brick walls, but why are your arguments a reason for keeping things as-is?

And no, I don't know what the German law in question says.
 
AbsolutEnduser said:
Actually the OP has a good point and I hope someday this is a precedent for banning all tinted rear-windows. It's that way in Germany for example. And for a reason
Click to expand...

no... you should be far enough back so that you can see the car or cars in front of the SUV without having to look through two of their windows. this accident is clear. he was following too close. live and learn. i bet this doesn't happen again.
 
Stay to the sides of the lanes so when they do slam on the brakes you have a chance to go round, because sometimes stopping quickly behind a SUV on the freeway is not a good thing... :rockhardplace :twofinger

edit: oh, and OP... sorry you trashed your bike.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what the German law is about vehicle windows, but you see plenty of box-trucks that nobody is seeing anything through there. One pretty wild thing they do, however - on commercial vehicles, you will see 2 numbers in circles on the rear bumper - like 40 and 65 - those are the Maximum allowed speed for those trucks on A and B roads, printed right there for all to see, AND, business trucks have data-loggers on the dash - required in Germany - so if you get pulled over driving one the polizei can ask you to hand over the disk and they can see EXACTLY how fast you were driving that day - wild, huh ? Wonder how the US trucking lobby would like them apples ?
 
Tydive said:
Stay to the sides of the lanes so when they do slam on the brakes you have a chance to go round, because sometimes stopping quickly behind a SUV on the freeway is not a good thing
Click to expand...

Yeah, then you can be the lucky contestant that runs over the face of a downed motorcyclist the car was stopping for, because you were following too close and decided that swerving like a GP hero was better.

Having a proper following distance is always the best start, it leaves more options.
 
As for SUVs with cargo, stick to the slowest right or next-to-right lane then. Why would you want to be in a hurry? You want to drop a ladder or a couch at higher speed, and in the fast lane?

In the OP's case, if the SUV were not driving like a prick in the fast lane , being too close to the car in front, the SUV wouldn't have slammed on the brakes.
 
On monday night, I was driving in San Jose on an open road in the night.
Respecting the speed limit going in in a straight line in the #1 lane of a three lane road.
Car peeled out from a street on the left with gusto and I almost slammed into them if I didn't see them start to come out and brake when I saw their move. Couldn't swerve since there was one car to my side.
If I rear ended them, I would have fought on the basis that they entered into my right of way, as it wouldn't be the typical straight line rear end :dunno

Not sure what other 1% of cases might apply to not being at fault when hitting from the rear.
 
Dorkhedeos said:
If you brake checked a cop because somebody brake checked you and you got him to hit you in the slow lane, would he be at fault for tailgating you?
Click to expand...

Yes, he would be at fault because he is violating CVC 21703.

21703. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway. It's a common sense argument that if you hit someone from behind and there were no extenuating circumstances (illegal lane change) you were simply following too close.
 
The question of fault has never come up, because I've managed to ride in such a way, to never hit someone.
The running calculation of time, space, speeds, paths, traction..just seems to work.
 
Yeah, he'd be at fault, then he'd get out of his car and put a hole in your lung.
 
Albal0ney said:
No, rear-ending someone is not ALWAYS your fault.

Last year on 85S before Saratoga exit, a car cut off the car in front of me, she had to slam on her brakes. I slammed on mine, stopped 2 inches before her car. The car behind me however didn't stop in time, hit me and the force propelled me into the car in front, even though I had already stopped completely and my foot was still on the brake.

I explained this to the CHP and he assigned me no blame. You could tell that I had completely stopped because the indentation that my license plate bolts made on the car in front were lower on her rear bumper, than if I had not been at maximum braking.

I didn't have to pay for anything, everything was paid for by the woman who rear-ended me, causing me to rear-end someone else.

Just think about it, if a garbage truck rear ended you, causing you to rear end the car in front, and you were completely at rest, would you have ANY blame? Not at all.
Click to expand...

Being moved into another vehicle when you're stopped.. guess that also goes into the 1% pool of not-at-fault rear ends. Didn't think about that scenario.
 
My old neighbor was rear ended and she was found to be at fault.
She pulled out onto the roadway in front of a car and then immediately hit the brakes because of a guy on a bike. I drove with her a couple of times and yes she was a terrible driver.
No she was not hawt.
RC
 
this was on 280 at 6pm on the 2nd lane, 1st lane was the fast lane. didnt want to lane split cus there was a lot of cars but now that i think about it, this wouldntve happened if i was...

or if i left even more space between us but i thought that it would encourage ppl to cut me off.
havnt u ever had ppl cut u off and then brake hard cus they r too close to the car that was in front of u?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top