Let’s say I’m driving down a rural street at night. I’m doing the posted speed limit of 50mph when all of a sudden someone backs their car out of their driveway into the street. Their car is occupying both lanes when the driver sees me coming directly at them, panics, and freezes. I quickly take note that there’s no way for me to stop in time to avoid an impact which would probably kill or at least severely maim us both. Luckily, I notice a field to my right, and quickly cut my wheel to the right while slamming on my brakes. Death is averted, but I run over a log/hit a goat/something else that causes a lot of damage to my car and/or myself, while Dinky McIdiot and his car are completely untouched.
Who is responsible for the damage to my car? Is it something that will go smoothly, or will the insurance companies battle it out for ages before I know?
This is a completely hypothetical situation that has not happened to me or anyone I know, I will not put stock in any answers I receive here, etc., but it’s something I’ve wondered about. I can see it going both ways, since Dinky has obviously been driving recklessly, but it was my decision to veer off into a field and technically his vehicle was not directly involved in the accident.
We’ll say that this happens in New Jersey, since that’s where I do all my driving.
The other driver should be able to be prosecuted for dangerous driving/causing an accident - those sorts of offences, but the effectiveness of that prosecution would be dependent on evidence, witnesses and for that matter, identifying the offender (if he drives on without stopping) - these things are of course true not only in this scenario, but they are particularly pertinent here, as in other cases, an impact between the two vehicles generates evidence in and of itself (as well as often causing the other driver to stop whether or not he wants to).
Then why is the speed limit 65 on most interstate highways?
Hypothetical: I’m driving at 65mph on a three lane highway. I am about to overtake a truck that is one lane to my right. The truck is carrying pianos. When the truck is about two car lengths ahead of me, one of the pianos unexpectedly falls off of the left side of the truck. Obviously, I don’t have enough time to react and the piano totals my car. I am at fault for driving too fast?
I agree that this is generally the rule, but absolute adherence to this principle would be ridiculously impractical in some scenarios, for example:
-A crossroads where the road on which you are driving has the full right of way (vehicles entering the road on which you are driving are expected to stop or give way). High banks or hedges prevent you from seeing any vehicles on these side roads until they are actually at the junction (where they should stop, look and wait for you). Are you expected to slow down in case someone ignores the stop sign and drives out onto the road? To do so is effectively giving way to the traffic that is supposed to give way to you.
-Another one: you’re driving along a country lane at 30mph and a horse leaps over a hedge, landing six feet in front of your vehicle; by the time your foot has reached the brake pedal, the horse is on your lap; are you at fault for having driven too fast to have been able to avoid this unexpected hazard?
I have to disagree here. Even at 20mph, if something pops out at you at a certain distance, there’s going to be nothing you can do to avoid it.
This is a situation I HAVE been in. I’m doing the speed limit of 35mph, girl in a parking lot on the right side of the street pulls out to make a left turn. Unfortunately, that put her car in the exact space my car was to be occupying in about 3 seconds. She got T-boned and I got a shiny new car (well, a shiny car that was new to me) from the nice folks at her insurance company.
Say Dinky McIdiot admits to everything happening exactly as it did. What happens then? Does his auto insurance cover it? Do I have to take him to civil court? Am I SOL?
As an afterthought to my previous post, if Dinky had been driving ahead of me and suddenly slammed on his brakes to avoid hitting the goat, and I was driving too closely/too fast to avoid rear ending him, then I realize I would definitely be at fault for veering into a field and running over a log. This doesn’t seem like the same type of situation, and as mentioned, I’m theoretically doing the posted speed limit in this scenario (we can say I’m doing ten under because it’s night time, but that doesn’t change much).
Different states have different rules about fault/no-fault so it’s hard to say in general what the result of this accident would be.
However, a posted speed limit does not absolve the driver of responsibility. You and you alone are responsible for driving your car at a speed appropriate for the road and conditions. This isn’t to say that the other driver isn’t at fault, but that just because the speed limit is posted at 50MPH doesn’t mean that you can drive 50 MPH and expect everyone to react to you.
I guess I picked a bad example. My question wasn’t so much about this exact scenario as it was “I’m driving along, obeying the law and minding my own business, someone else does something stupid and I take action that avoids a dangerous impact but still damages my car.”
If it makes it easier, we can say I’m stopped at a red light, when someone does something stupid resulting in a two car accident in the intersection. One car comes flying at me at a billion miles an hour, and I cut my wheel and hit the gas and drive onto someone’s lawn to avoid being hit. The flying car smashed into the car that was behind me, and I hop a curb, blow out all four tires, and take out a mailbox. I never came into contact with another vehicle, but I still want my damages paid for somehow.
(To avoid any nit-picking regarding property damage, we’ll pretend that the lawn conveniently belonged to my millionaire grandmother and she doesn’t care.)
I take it one way or another this isn’t going to be exactly cut-and-dry, but I’m wondering about the most likely outcome.
I suspect your insurance company would happily pay to have your car fixed. The other option (if you hadn’t reacted) would have been to pay for a completely totalled vehicle and medical expenses.
It might be covered under comprehensive rather collision. That’s the case if you hit something like a deer. In which case, you pay the deductible and your insurance pays for the rest.
If it’s under collision, all you’re concerned about is your deductible. If it’s your fault, you have to pay it. If it’s not, you might not have to pay it.
I think **SmackFu ** is getting at the meat of it. Note that if your car is paid for, you aren’t required to have comprehensive coverage, so not everyone has it. Most lenders require you to carry comprehensive coverage to protect their asset, your car.
The closest situation I was in personally was kind of the reverse. I backed my old clunker into someone’s parked vehicle. There was no damage to the battleship I was driving, but I somehow did $1,800 of damage to their minivan! I, like an honest McIdiot, left my insurance information for them and my insurance paid the claim, and raised my rates by oodles next time around. It seems to be the reverse of the OP, in that the injured party was absolutely not at fault, and the guilty party had no vehicle damage. Had I not left my insurance info, I suppose the victim could have used her comprehensive covererage, if she had it, or been SOL.
Since I hail from NJ, the land of completely ridiculous insurance rates, I’ve settled for liability only. If I get into an accident, I either get paid by the other party’s insurance company, or I get nothing, which is why this sort of thing matters (sort of).
Nonsense. There is no speed at which you can avoid accidents from people violating the right of way.
I was traveling down a city street, at the speed limit or below, when someone pulled out of a store driveway right in front of me. I was able to slow down enough so that when I hit him the airbag did not deploy, but I still hit him. I was not considered at fault at all.
It helped that this clown was driving on a suspended license and was uninsured, of course. The cop who came checked to see that I had been wearing a seatbelt (I was) and then gave it to this guy. My insurance rates did not go up at all.
I suspect if the investigation showed that the OPs case happened as described, the driver of the 50 mph car would not be considered at fault, and would not see an increase in insurance rates. One could argue that by driving defensively the driver averted a much more serious and costly accident.
The answer is…it depends. Actually you’ll find that to be the answer to most insurance questions. Factors will include state law, how your policy is written, how their policy is written etc. In a case where you are driving perfectly legally and someone backs out, you swerve to avoid - Most likely is that they will be classed at fault for failure to yield right of way. It could be argued that you are partially at fault but the majority fault would lie with them.
As always, this is based on my experience as a claims adjuster and may not reflect state law in your area.
There is such thing as a non-contact hit and run, this is not the same as a ‘one car accident’ which could be a tree falling, a bridge collapsing or something like that.
[QUOTE=e-logic
]
You should always drive at a speed that will allow you to stop in the case of an unexpected hazard in the road.
You were going too fast.
[/QUOTE]
Um No. The answer to every traffic accident is not you were going too fast, this does not seem the issue here. Yes if he drove slower it could have been avoided, but might have been rearended by someone driving at the natural speed limit.
Are you asking what will happen in regards to whose insurance, if any, will pay for the damage?
Or are you aking who would be held liable in a court of law as to the damages?
The issue in a court of law is the standard of care each party was required to adhere to, and whether or not they did, and, if they didn’t, did that failure proximately cause the damage complained of?
Don’t ask for an explanation of “proximate cause;” torts classes in law schools devote whole quarters to it. Suffice it to say that any damage that the states courts consider reasonable to grant recovery for are proximately caused.
In short, both drivers in the OP could be “at fault,” and each driver could have some liability for the damages. The extent will depend upon the tort law of the state in which the accident happened.
In general, the insurance question would be answered by the tort law question, but there can be exceptions.
Really, really short answer: there are NEVER short answers to such questions; that’s why you hire attorneys.
This is an overgeneralization. You have a duty to avoid accidents even if someone else was negligent first. You might be able to take advantage of the sudden emergency doctrine in a case where you swerve off the road to avoid colliding with another vehicle. But the fact that somebody else is at fault doesn’t mean that you aren’t too.
And the police aren’t the final arbiters of fault. You can sue even if you get a ticket, and you can be sued even if you don’t.
The allocation of fault in the OP would depend on things like weather and road conditions, distance between the vehicles when the blocking car was first visible, and how fast the vehicle on the road was going. Obviously, the backing car lacked the right of way, but only with respect to vehicles that presented an immediate hazard:
The degree of difficulty that you would experience collecting from the insurer of the backing vehicle would depend on the same kinds of factors plus an additional factor: the insurer’s general willingness to settle claims. Of course, if you were in Michigan, you’d be out of luck if you didn’t have collision and comprehensive coverage. The most you can sue the other driver for is $500. Michigan Legislature - Section 500.3135