> Are rear-end accidents always the faults of the car behind?

Are rear-end accidents always the faults of the car behind?

Posted at: 2015-04-14 
People always say that the car that hits the car in-front is at fault no matter what. But I don't think that.

I was involved in an accident because the car in front of me suddenly for NO REASON decided to slam the brakes and had complete stop in the street. No I was NOT ''following to close'' or 'not paying attention. The thing is unless I am in the other driver head, I can't slam my brakes at the SAME TIME as they do which what happened. In order to avoid hitting the car in front I must push my brakes at the exact same second as they do which isn't possible especially if there isn't traffic.

I think the other person was texting or something. But of course their insurance decided that it is my fault. I would never ever slam my brakes especially in a highway because that is the major cause of car accidents. When someone push their brakes hard at a high speed, the driver will immediately loose control. Unfortunately, drivers especially women always do it.

What do you think?

Yes you WERE following too close.

You should be about 2 seconds behind the car in front. This works at any speed, the faster you are going, the more space 2 seconds gives you.

Why 2 seconds? It takes the average driver about 1.5 seconds to realise the car in front has suddenly started braking, and get their foot over to the brake pedal and get on the brakes themselves. You therefore hit the brakes just before the spot on the raod where they did, so you should be able to stop, also just short of them on the road. If you are only 1 sec behind, you ARE going to hit them.

Now you might not be expecting the car in front to stop, at it might have been unwise for them to do so. But it doesn't excuse you hitting them. There are any number of reasons a car might suddenly stop without warning. A pedestrian? Animal on the road? Debris off the back of a truck? You need drive drive as if everyone else on the road is a total idiot and may do anything at random times.

Now not EVERY rear end accident is the fault of the following driver. For instance a slow moving car could make a sudden lane change in front of you, and you can't avoid hitting them. But the first offence is their unsafe lane change into the path of traffic. Or a car could suddenly reverse out onto the road in front of you, appearing suddenly and leaving you no time to stop. But 99% of the time, it's the car at the rear of the accident that's at fault.

Not always. For example, if someone shifts into reverse and backs into a parked car, that is the fault of the person driving backwards, not the car behind.

However, you are definitely at fault, and this is not even a cloe call.

You are never, ever, under any circumstances, allowed to drive so close that if someone slams on the brakes you won't be able to stop in time to avoid hitting them. That is what "too close" means. If you are close enough that you can't stop without hitting them, then you are too close.

It doesn't matter if they were texting, speeding, drunk, unlicensed, an illegal alien, or a Martian.

Of course, there insurance said that it is my fault, but they haven't "decided" this; it's the law, not their decision to make.

Because drivers sometimes need to push their brakes hard at a high speed, other drivers must always keep far enough back to be able to stop in time when this happens. Unfortunately, some drivers, especially men who use Yahoo Answers, don't follow this law.

If you feel that you would have needed to hit your brakes at the exact same moment as the car ahead of you hits theirs, then you are following them too damned close for the speed at which you both were traveling.

It is ALWAYS the responsibility of the car behind to maintain a safe distance, based on the speed of the traffic. That is why in such an accident, the rearwards car is at fault.

No. Sometimes people reverse without looking behind, then unless there are witnesses, you will get the blame if they hit you.

Almost every time though, it is the fault of the driver in the following car.

"They stopped for no reason" ? You mean YOU don't know why they stopped. And they don't need a reason anyway. There's no law against stopping.

"No I was NOT ''following to close'' or 'not paying attention."

Oh dear. No amount of denial will change the facts. If you go into the back of someone, by definition, you were driving too fast, or too close, or not paying attention. Or any combination of those things.

The driver in front of you doesn't need to give you a reason why they braked. If they brake and you hit them YOU''RE going to be found at fault.

If you were close enough that you couldn't stop, even if it was for a random reason, then you were too close. By law, if you cannot control our vehicle to avoid an accident, then you are not in proper control of our car. Face it, you messed up.

You don't have to slam your brakes at the same second if you have more following distance. The amount of distance that allows you sufficient time to stop is the correct amount of following distance. Less distance than that is following too closely, and is why it is your fault.

Unless you can prove fraud (person ahead of you staged the accident), then yeah, it's your fault.

Yes, that means you were following too close. You have to follow at a distance that gives you time to react to and still stop.

99% of the time.