Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

[kilasuit]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

chest is fine

just a muscle strain from the seatbelt thats all.


i was at least 2 chevrons behind her and watching the traffic in front of her. Infact i tend to end up watching the traffic ahead or the car ahead more as in space of 3 weeks i have had at least 4 different cars do the exact same except this time this car must have had brand new breaks as she was almost stopped in a matter of at most 2 seconds.
I am not taking the fault here as there was no need whatsoever for her to brake as harshly as she did.

And not all rear enders are the person travelling into the back's fault more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault

[mgfboy]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

chest is fine

just a muscle strain from the seatbelt thats all.


i was at least 2 chevrons behind her and watching the traffic in front of her. Infact i tend to end up watching the traffic ahead or the car ahead more as in space of 3 weeks i have had at least 4 different cars do the exact same except this time this car must have had brand new breaks as she was almost stopped in a matter of at most 2 seconds.
I am not taking the fault here as there was no need whatsoever for her to brake as harshly as she did.

And not all rear enders are the person travelling into the back's fault more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault

Trust me on this you will have great diificulty arguing the points above, unless you have multiply witnesses and CCTV, also the fact that you where two chevrons behind her should have given you plenty of time to stop no matter who good her brakes are, sorry.

[Deepie]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

chest is fine

just a muscle strain from the seatbelt thats all.


i was at least 2 chevrons behind her and watching the traffic in front of her. Infact i tend to end up watching the traffic ahead or the car ahead more as in space of 3 weeks i have had at least 4 different cars do the exact same except this time this car must have had brand new breaks as she was almost stopped in a matter of at most 2 seconds.
I am not taking the fault here as there was no need whatsoever for her to brake as harshly as she did.

And not all rear enders are the person travelling into the back's fault more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault

I think you're wasting your time here if you pursue this.............That's my opinion

[LooLoo]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

Sorry hun got to agree with the previous two posts....... very unlikely you will be found not at fault - i know it's unfair - but so hard to prove

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

I cannot think in all my time driving I have ever come across a rear end shunt where the person in front has taken the blame however crap they have been driving.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I have not driven a motor vehicle since 1986. I'd be happily pootling along, observing the speed limit and maintaining a safe braking distance from the vehicle in front, when I'd get a moron in the car behind me driving much too close, flashing his lights and sounding his horn as if he was having a fit. When I pulled over a little (when it was safe) the jerk would invariably overtake as if I was stationary, whilst he indicated that no Frenchman had yet cut off his bow fingers.

Some people when troubled by a "tailgater" might blip their brake pedal, just to give the idiot a bit of a fright, but I devised my own way to persuade them it was NOT WISE to follow so closely. I used the direction indicators...

Turning right, flash, flash, flash, off, turning left, flash, flash, flash, off, turning right, flash, flash, flash, off, turning left, flash, flash, flash, off, turning right, flash, flash, flash, off, turning left, flash, flash, flash, off, turning right, flash, flash, flash, off, turning left, flash, flash, flash, off, turning right, flash, flash, flash, off, turning left, flash, flash, flash, off...

After about a minute or two of this, the car behind usually pulled back as I had successfully communicated that I apparently did not know what I was doing. Would you want to drive so closely to someone who might even reverse next?

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

i ended up rear ending her

After the collision?

[jen_br]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

Ok im gonna do a bit of research and tell you the braking distance on your vehicle.

so car.. make model.. last mot and year of rego.

If you were travelling 2 chevrons apart from her (and how do you know she wasn't trying to avoid hitting something??) you had plenty of time to stop.


I don't mean to sound harsh but the reality is the accident was your fault. You ran into her.

[helmsman]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

After the collision?

Either way he is fucked

[BBoo]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

i was at least 2 if not 3 car lengths behind her and all of a sudden shes performing an emergency stop from 60mph with no due reason.

I even looked to see if i could move into the middle lane but that would have caused a multi car collision and most likely left me in hospital with broken bones etc

chest is fine

just a muscle strain from the seatbelt thats all.


i was at least 2 chevrons behind her and watching the traffic in front of her. Infact i tend to end up watching the traffic ahead or the car ahead more as in space of 3 weeks i have had at least 4 different cars do the exact same except this time this car must have had brand new breaks as she was almost stopped in a matter of at most 2 seconds.
I am not taking the fault here as there was no need whatsoever for her to brake as harshly as she did.

And not all rear enders are the person travelling into the back's fault more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault

OK - Which is it 2 or 3 car lengths or at least 2 chevrons? Chevrons are 40 metres apart (Source: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum.../dg_191928.pdf )

If 2 chevrons, this means at least 80 metres behind the car in front - approximately 240 feet. That is just short of the length of a professional football pitch (100m-110m long).

Let's assume 80 metres. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say 3 car lengths. This means, according to you, the average car length is 26.67 metres long, or approx. 80 feet long. I don't think so!

I'm sorry, but your gut reaction is likely to be accurate (2-3 car lengths). A very large car can be up to 18 feet long, most are about 12-14 feet. This means you were driving far too close, not slightly too close, way too close to the vehicle in front. YOU were an accident waiting to happen..... and guess what? It did!


As for this, "more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault" Well, I've never read such absolute rubbish in all my life. In my opinion, if this is your view of safe driving, you should at least be looking at some further training to update your knowledge and skills, and possibly even consider resitting your driving test to ensure your ability to drive safely on public roads.

[ken100464]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

I would also add to all the above.

If you had time to stop because you say you were x distance away and therefore its the other persons fault then be careful what you are saying.

If you had time to stop cause you were driving a safe distance behind but you didnt that in my book could lead to the fuzz looking at you for driving without due care and attention.

That will be way more serious than what you are looking at now.

By all means do not accept the responsibility as the insurer will wish you to do. But like every other poster on here so far you are not going to win. What you are going to do is draw peoples attention to you possibly driving what could be termed recklessly.

Metal can always be replaced. Its what insurance is for. As long as you and the other person walked away from it thats all that matters.

This really isnt a battle you wish to fight trust us all on this one.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

What we don't yet know is whether she enjoyed being rear-ended.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

I ran into the back of someone when I was 20 years old....yes it was a woman's fault

I was to busy looking at her short shirt she was walking in the opposite direction.

She shouldn't have been wearing a short skirt.

I think this was noted as one of the main overriding facts of male car crashes for the last 4 years or something.... usually throughout summer months too I believe

Feckin pervs

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

And not all rear enders are the person travelling into the back's fault more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault

Actually wrong mate, totally and so far wrong you could be in Mars.

If a car is rear-ended then the car that caused the impact is always the immediate fault. So you will be at fault, love it or hate it - you are mate.

Think about the scams where pack people deliberately crank the anchors on at roundabouts etc - so you deliberately go up their arse? Happens all the time yet the car that hit them is always at fault.

Why do you think when this happens the car you hit usually has 27 people inside it

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

As for this, "more often than not it is the person whos been rear ended's fault" Well, I've never read such absolute rubbish in all my life. In my opinion, if this is your view of safe driving, you should at least be looking at some further training to update your knowledge and skills, and possibly even consider resitting your driving test to ensure your ability to drive safely on public roads.

Ok, we get the point

^^^ That's what you call a BBoo bollocking

[BBoo]

Re: Small crash Thurs 3rd Jan 2013

Ok, we get the point

^^^ That's what you call a BBoo bollocking

NO! That's a a BBoo wagging of the finger; next comes the BBoo ticking off, THEN comes the BBoo bollocking!