Uk Car Crash Insurance Will This Statement Absolve Vehicle 4 From Blame?
On the motorway in the day road conditions are dry 4 cars travelling along 1 to 4
Vehicle 4 was following the vehicle 3 travelling at 70 mile per hour, at a fixed distance using the 2 second rule as stated in the Department for Transport’s Highway Code rule 126.
The driver of vehicle 3 had either failed to adhere to the 2 second rule as stated in the Department for Transport’s Highway Code rule 126 or failed to brake in time. When the cars in front of him braked, he crashed into the Vehicle 2 pushing Vehicle 2 into vehicle 1. This all occurred before Vehicle 4 become involved in the incident. I have spoken with the drivers of Vehicle 1 and 2 and they both agree that felt 2 separate jolts as there were 2 collisions.
The driver of vehicle 4 braked hard as soon as vehicle 3 had started to break. But due to the failure of vehicle 3 to either maintain a correct distance or failing to break in time crashing to the Vehicle 2, this ate into the distance that vehicle 4 has to brake.
At 70 mph, a vehicle is travelling at 102.6 ft/sec. With the 2-second rule. That is 205.2 ft behind. The 2 second rule only works if the vehicle in front allows himself a enough of a braking distance in front of him to increase the distance for the car behind him from 153.9 ft to 315 ft (the thinking and braking distance stated in the Highway Code).
There was no way that Vehicle 4 could possibly avoid a collision despite following all of the rules in the Department for Transport’s Highway Code. There were cars travelling in the lane to the left and a barrier to the right. This prevented Vehicle 4 from being able to manoeuvre the vehicle away from the collision.
In conclusion the sole blame of the accident is the driver of vehicle 3. As he had either;
• Failed to adhere to the 2 second rule as stated in the Department for Transport’s Highway Code rule 126.
• Failed to brake in time.
In any proceedings, whether civil or criminal, only the Department for Transport’s current printed version of the Code should be relied upon.
You might also like :
Advertisement
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:53 pm
“…the failure of vehicle 3 to either maintain a correct distance or failing to break in time crashing to the Vehicle 2, this ate into the distance that vehicle 4 has to brake.”
I think I understand your meaning to be, #3 stopped in a shorter distance than expected when it encountered a stationary object.
But I don’t think that will matter — for example, if #3 had stopped short of the collision thanks to better than average brakes and/or better than average driver response time, would you still blame them for damage to #4?
Good luck with it, though.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:16 am
If vehicle 4 hit vehicle 3, he was driving too close. The 2-second rule is crap, it only works in good conditions and assumes everybody is paying attention and has a good reaction time. Whatever distance is left by vehicle 3, 2, 1 or anybody else ahead of vehicle 4 is irrelevant, the only vehicle that could actually cut into the safety zone of vehicle 4 would be a vehicle 5.
So, if I am the insurance adjuster, or the police officer, the only vehicle not at fault it vehicle 1. Vehicle 2 would not have been pushed into him if there was adequate safety zone, Vehicle 3 would not have hit vehicle 2 if there was adequate safety zone, and vehicle 4 would not have hit vehicle 3 if there was adequate safety zone.
Following distances, as taught in drivers ed, or in the driver handbooks, are guidelines, ABSOLUTE MINIMUMS, subject to adjustment upward, based on traffic, time of day, weather, road surface, etc.
So, unless somebody was drinking, or there was an unexpected mechanical problem, there are 3 drivers at fault.
Sorry, but counting the safety distance in front of the vehicle you are following is a little like leaving your headlights off because the vehicle in front has theirs on.
Edit:
Anytime you stop for a light, stop sign, or whatever, you are at the mercy of the person behind. But you can control what you do. At any intersection, look at how close people are stopped to each other. Notice probably 75% of them are close enough that, looking out the windshield, they could not see where the rear wheels of the vehicle in front touch the road. Every one of those vehicles is in a position that could see them quickly pushed into the vehicle in front if hit from behind. Watch those vehicles start up when the light goes green, and notice how many ride almost as close as they are accelerating away, trying to intimidate the person in front into going faster. Every one of those is in severe danger of hitting the car in front if the unexpected happens, such as a child running out into the road, something falling from a truck onto the road, causing the vehicle in front to switch from accelerating to slamming on the brakes. Defensive driving courses, taken seriously, teach you the unexpected can happen any time, and you are responsible for ensuring, as best as possible, you drive with safety in mind.
In 43 years of driving, and well over 1 1/2 million miles I have never rear-ended anybody, nor have I ever been pushed into another vehicle.
Not saying a person is always at fault if pushed into one, there are a few notable exceptions. My brother was a safe distance behind a vehicle, and a car was a safe distance behind him, when another vehicle plowed into the line doing 60 mph, sandwiching everybody. You can’t leave enough of a zone to prevent that one, and, in such an instance, only the 4th vehicle is at fault. Not only was the vehicle not slowing for the intersection, but was well over the speed limit.
You can be a safe distance behind the vehicle in front, and be rear-ended by a large truck, which has the momentum to make your safety zone in front meaningless.
However, in the question, I see no reference to vehicle number 4 going a high rate of speed, or to it being a large, heavy vehicle.
By the way, it is also possible for insurance to assign fault to vehicles number 2, 3, and 4, in such an accident, totally independent of any charges laid or tickets issued by the investigating constabulary. They do their own investigations over and above the police report.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:14 am
Long story short: 99% of the time, if you rear end someone, you are at fault. In this scenario, I’m betting car # 4 will not be in the other 1%. Besides, it matters not what we say here. Cops and/or Insurance companies assign fault, not us or you. Let the insurance companies worry about the fault