I was in a fender bender today and I received a citation for “following too close”.
Heres my story: It was on a narrow one lane road, quite busy due to after-work rush-hour. It was pretty much bumper to bumper traffic at a stoplight. When the light turned green all the cars in front of me proceeded to accelerate and so did I. Pretty much rountine. Then all of a sudden one of the cars stopped for no reason and the car (a woman) directly in front of me stopped, I slammed the brakes and hit her in the back bumper.
There were minor damages to both vehicles. We exchanged insurance info and her damages will be taken care of.
Anyways, I accept that it was my fault, but the policeman issued me a citation saying I was “following too close” and I will need to appear in court, or, pay the fine and not appear in court. Although, I accepted responsibility and all, I do not agree with his conclusion. I plan to go to court and fight this all the way. My defense is that I can not be wronged for tailgating if it was bumper to bumper traffic and we had started from a complete stop (obviously you’re going to be initially close to the cars both in front and behind you)…
So I need help and advice from anyone with similar histories. Maybe some lawyers out there can give me some tips on what to say to increase my chances of the judge ruling in my favor. I refuse to pay a $100 or more fine just because they cop was lazy and didn’t put forth any effort to investigate the situation.
You may want to check your state’s dept. of motor vehicle rules & regs for safe following distances.
Couple of sites:
Thats totally the opposite of my point. I’m not debating whether or not I was close, I am TELLING you I was close because we were all starting from a stopped position in bumper to bumper traffic. And because of that, I should not get a citation for “following too close”
And we’re telling you that you’ll lose. When starting from a dead stop directly behind another car, you must wait until that car is a safe distance away from you before you start moving; if you start moving before then, you are “following too close.” As that car accelerates, you must allow a greater and greater distance to open up; failure to do so, even during those first few seconds of a green light, is “following too close.” Yes, I know no one does it that way; neither do I. The law, however, requires that you drive cautiously and defensively – you assume any risk for doing differently.
Your dispute seems to center on whether you were “plain close” or “too close”.
The fact that you were unable to stop in time is evidence that you were indeed too close. The fact that you “started from a stopped position in bumper to bumper traffic” is irrelevant. You’re not supposed to move your car as soon as the light turns green. First you allow the front car to get far enough from you, and then you can move your own car.
If you fight anything, you should really research the law first. That is what the judge will use. Look at the law for your state for “following too close” and see if you can knock it down. Here, I doubt that you will win, especially after ADMITTING fault!
If you hit the car in front of you, you were following too close.
There is one channel you may wish to pursue. The driver whose car you collided might be willing to testify that the car in front of her braked erratically (for no apparent reason). This is one of the few things that could possibly ameliorate your culpability.
Several years ago, while waiting at a stop light, I saw some vehicles proceed when the signal turned green. The leading car suddenly slammed on its brakes for absolutely no apparent reason. The trailing car impacted the first one.
I immediately pulled over and got out my business cards. I approached the driver of the second car and loudly informed him that I was an eye witness to the fact that the other driver had braked for no apparent reason and appeared to be driving erratically. The driver of the first vehicle suddenly shut up and abandoned his attempts to begin proceedings against the second driver. From what I could see, it was a classic variation on the old “swoop and squat.”
Had I been in this incident, I would NOT have admitted fault. Once a driver suddenly pulled in front of my vehicle by making a sharp left turn in front of me. They were driving from the opposite direction. I slammed into the side of the other car, and it LOOKED like my fault. However, the other driver was cited for an illegal left turn, and my insurance company did not hold me liable. Other party was uninsured, too. FWIW
I don’t think you have an argument. It is your responsibility to maintain a safe distance between you and the car in front of you, even after a stop. As Keeve said, if you’re too close to stop, you are obviously following too close.
In Ohio it’s called assured clear distance, meaning a distance from the vehicle ahead of you that you can be assured of not impacting (paraphrasing). Previous posters have shown you that you have almost no case, but I wonder if you realize that you drove your vehicle into the back of another vehicle that was moving forward. Either you were speeding, or not paying attention, or “following too close” to the vehicle ahead of you. Point is, you drive in a forward motion, it is your responsibility to avoid impact with persons, objects and vehicles in front of your vehicle. This is what brakes are for.
I do however feel your pain. I have been in 2 accidents that should have been written off as “bumper taps”.
In the first incident, my foot slipped off the brake (due to rain) while the car in front of me and myself were stopped at a light. We were 4 feet apart at the very most, yet when my car idled into his, his wife started screaming “whiplash!!” almost literally. We inspected each others bumpers, and there was not so much as a bent license plate or cracked paint finish. He went to call the cops, and being a prudent 17 year old, I turned to my younger brother next to me and said “Never, ever do this!” I drove away very quickly. Their motive was obviously to get free trips to the chiropractor, or getting a cash settlement from some kid.
The second incident was in a drive-thru lane right at the window. The car in front of me left the window rapidly, and I accelerated, the car came to a very abrupt halt, and I contacted it. He became very irate, there was an ensuing argument and I ended up paying for his “repair” out of pocket.
I was completely at fault in both cases. Situations vary, and there is as yet no law against people who want to abuse the law, or act irresponsibly and get away with it.
Either find some sort of strange loophole, or plead no-contest. If you try that bumper-to-bumper trafic stuff with the judge, he’ll likely get very upset, and hit you with a potentially harsher sentence than if you had just admited your ignorance.
I have to disagree. Sure, any time you rear end a person you are by definition “too close.” However, if that person does some moronic thing can you really be blamed for hitting them. There are many times while driving that you have to turn your attention elsewhere and assume the person in front is going to drive like they have been behind the wheel before. You are the second car at a yeild. The car in front starts to go, you look and see that there are no cars on the road and the idiot in front stops for no reason. You are at a very confusing intersection. Your light has just turned green and you begin to accelerate. The person in front stops because they suddenly are not certain that the green is theirs. You are begining to move after a light has turned green and the moron in front puts on his brake to find the cigarette they just dropped. You hit them. In all of these cases the situation is so routine, and your expectations so high, that you just can’t react in time. I personally don’t think it sounds like Soul was following too close for the situation, just too closely behind an idiot driver.
Did you not read my description of the drive-thru incident? You miss my point entirely. I am not illustrating why HE is wrong, but rather that stupid people do stupid things, and they usually get away with it. The law doesn’t always serve those with common sense.
Dauerbach, did you miss this:
It wasn’t the woman who was hit by SoulSearching who was driving erratically. She was trying to avoid causing a rear-ender herself.
As such, it seems like everyone was following more closely than they should’ve been, which is a problem in heavy traffic. This is a large reason why there are so many stupid, traffic-worsening accidents during rush hour. The few seconds that it would take to leave a safe distance between yourself and the car ahead are not going to make you any later than you are or extend your drive in any appreciable fashion and can save you a bunch of money and points on your license.
Why do you admit that it was your fault yet deny you were following too closely? 
Not to mention crazy 20-car pileups in bad weather.
In Alabama, the 2-second rule applies, especially when driving at speed. In stop-n-go traffic, in order to maintain a safe distance, you should always be able to see the bottom of the tires of the vehicle in front of you. About 1/2 a car length for cars, more if it’s a larger vehicle. This serves 2 purposes: it allows a buffer if you are hit from behind (so you won’t hit the car in front of you) and it gives manuevering room in case emergency vehicles need to get through.
Wow so basically I have no defense. I admitted it was my fault because just about anytime you rear-end someone, it is your fault. So there is no denying that. I agreed to pay for the damages to the other vehicle. I did not appreciate the fact that the policeman barely asked any questions about what happened and immediately hit me with a citation. It seemed he was upset that he had to get out of his car in the 90+ degree weather to handle this little fender bender matter.
I want to fight this because if I don’t, I will get points on my record. And BTW, does your insurance company find out about this even if say, you paid the damages out of your own pocket (i.e. no calls or claims to the insurance company whatsoever).
To the lawyers out there, what defense is there to argue that “I was following close” but not “too close under driving laws standards” but I hit the person in front of me anyway? Am I doomed?
Well, IIRC, badge is a police officer (of jurisdiction unknown to me), so you have his answer. I’m a former prosecutor, though in California, and you have not given sufficient facts for me to help you one way or another (don’t bother adding to the facts unless it’s a doozy, and by the professional standards of my state, I cannot offer you legal advice here, or anywhere else for that matter - 1. You aren’t my client, and won’t be. No offense intended, I just don’t do that work; AND 2. I am not licensed to practice in Georgia.) So for the record, here comes the DISCLAIMER: I am an attorney, but I’m not YOUR attorney. This opinion is not to be construed as legal advice. It is neither an offer nor an acceptance of legal representation, in this or any other matter. If you have any questions, you should SEEK COMPETENT LEGAL COUNSEL IN YOUR JURISDICTION.
I hate to add to this like this, SoulSearching, but there are very few exceptions to the already-stated rule that “if you hit someone from behind, you are, by definition, following too closely.” from the facts as you’ve stated them, none of them seem to apply here. The reason why the police officer didn’t ask many questions is that he could pretty easily look at the situation and exclude any of those very few reasons (e.g. the “swoop-and-squat”). Just to clarify, it’s not merely “following too closely,” it’s "following too closely to avoid an accident if the person in front of you has to stop unexpectedly.
OTOH, I have to disagree with dnoorman insofar as he says that the judge will add charges or punish you more harshly for arguing your side of things. You have the Constitutional right to have your day in court, even if you’re dead-to-rights wrong. And the judge is forbidden from enhancing things merely because you demand that right. He CAN, however, not cut you a break if he thinks you’re acting without remorse, which I’ve never seen in a traffic case where the defendant said his peace ONCE. On the gripping hand, if he says what’s been said here, hush up and take your lumps, or he then may NOT cut you the break he was earlier willing to do.
As to your other questions, it’s a matter of jurisdiction. In California, you are allowed to take a Traffic Violators’ School for certain violations, which may or may not include following too closely, if your jurisdiction has such a program. The court should be able to tell you if a program to keep points off your license exists in your state, and whether your violation permits such school. If a school exists, it is likely that the points may not be used against you for insurance purposes - again, check with a specialist or the court in your jurisdiction before acting on this information.
If there is no program and you’re convicted, yes, the insurance company will find out about the ticket, and will conclude that you’ve had an accident from the conviction.
By he, I meant the judge. It makes much more sense that way. :smack:
They will probably find out about the citation as they periodically check state driving records. I don’t know if they can check that you paid for the accident, though. Also, check your policy - it may well obligate you to report the accident anyway. If you don’t and they find out, they could terminate your insurance. Then when you look for new insurance there will be that nasty question “Have you ever been refused insurance?”