by akumafx » Sat Dec 08, 2007 08:51 am
My car spins 540 degrees to a complete stop, but faces oncomming traffic. 5-6 cars pass on other lane but the next car spins out of control and swings his back driver's side into my front side. All cars behind the other driver are able to stop for the accident. Who's at fault?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:37 am Post Subject:
Well this one is complicated. You have a good point that other vehicles before and after were able to stop...But also maybe the guy that hit you's view was obstructed. Why did you spin out of control to begin with? What type of roadway were you on? What was the posted speed limit? What state are you in? How far back could the other vehicle see that your car was stopped? What were the road conditions? What was visibilitly like?
More than likely with the small amount of info we have there will definately be some comparative negligence on the other driver. With only the facts you have provided thus far, I'd hazard a 50/50 guess...alot depends on your answers to the questions I have asked...
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 07:30 pm Post Subject:
Thanks for the super quick reply,
I spoke to the other driver the next day, he said he saw me, tired to get into the right lane to avoid me but spun out. It was lightly snowing, roads were VERY slippery, I spun out as I took the curve of the highway, speed limit 80 km, British Columbia, I was perfectly fine, not sure how far back the driver saw me, clear visibility. my headlights and hazzards were on. Lastly, took pictures of other vehicle's tires, the back tires have uneven wear on the edges, close to bald. Possibly his rear tires are under legal 2/32" tread minimum. The highway is 4 lanes North and south, split by a concrete divider. Tickets of speed relative to weather was issued after the accident to both myself and other driver. I have 4 snow tires on my vehicle, other car had snow tires in front and near bald all season tires in back. In my opinion, other driver should not have been going up to Whistler with tires in that condition. I think he was driving a dangerous vehicle relative to weather. Both of us drove off the highway into the shoulder lane to allow cars to pass us. Should I have just stayed put, wait for police, abulance and fire trucks and made all other cars wait as well?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 09:47 pm Post Subject:
Pulling off was a good idea to keep others out of danger, it is very possible that the same thing could happen again if you had not pulled off, so I believe this is a wise choice and what I would have done.
People drive in unsafe vehicles all the time on bad roads, unfortunately when we are in an accident with them we just hope like hell they have insurance and enough to cover our damage. Did you tell your insurance company about his bald tires, I am sure he is not smart enough to change them if he was dumb enough to drive on them. Maybe your insurance company can have someone check out the tires for you and document it properly.
I wish you luck in your situation, it is so involved, I hope everything works out for you. It sounds like the roads and weather condition played a major role in the whole scene.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:42 am Post Subject:
Should I have just stayed put, wait for police, abulance and fire trucks and made all other cars wait as well?
no, of course you did the right thing by getting out of the way especially since it was slick....I'm not sure how the negligence laws work in your country...or how severe an offense it is to have bad tires...since you state it was under the ''legal limit'' I can say that 2/32nds is really bad! :roll: even that translates to US! :P
I think you will still have a large (50) percent of the negligence attributed to you, but sounds like other guy will have a goodly portion as well. How does it work in BC? re:if your are 50/50 at fault ? Here it is state dependent, some (my state) each would pay 50% of the others damage (pure comparative negliegence) but some states would bar recovery (you have to be LESS than 50% or 49% or less to recover from the other party)....just wondering if you know how that works?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 09:58 pm Post Subject: 50/50
In B.C. 50/50 both parties will recieve 50% of vehicle repair. I'm not sure yet about the injuries part yet. At 50/50 both parties insurance rates will increase. 25/75%, 50/50% or 100/0% are the only fault percentages ICBC calculates, no other incriments.
Again, thanks for your quick replies. I was hoping you'd suggest 100% fault for the other party but, I guess it is what it is. I will find out what ICBC decision on who's at fault Dec 19th, 2007. I will keep updating the progress.
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:28 pm Post Subject:
I was hoping you'd suggest 100% fault for the other party
That was just my opinion based on the info provided, and of course (especially) being in the B.C. I have no personal practical knowlege, and think his tread depth (since you mentioned it is a law) may sway alittle more in your favor....Just if it were here based on the info I would more than likely give him 50%....sorry.....please do let us know the outcome and particulars leading to the decision making process by your adjuster, I'd like to learn alittle more about the process in the B.C. thanks and good luck! I hope for your sake (that rate increase thing is CRAZY!), it goes in your favor! :D
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 05:19 am Post Subject: Horah, it's not my fault
I was found not at fault for the accident. ICBC adjuster did find the other driver's rear tires to be bald. The adjuster didn't give me any other particulars on why the descision went my way. My car was written off and a cheque was issued to me. Now I have to fight the ticket of "speeding relative to weather ", which was issued to me when the police arrived after. The snow had covered my tracks, there were no witnesses as far as I know, how can I be issued a ticket just because an accident occured? Do I have a chance to beat the ticket?
Thanks again to all who replied to this thread
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:08 pm Post Subject: great!
I was found not at fault for the accident
WOOT! WOOT! akumafx!!! GREAT FOR YOU...as I said, I'm not familar with the BC, and apparently as you pointed out they take low tread on tires seriously in your neck of the woods! And yes, I'd say you have a great shot at beating your ticket! What a great Christmas gift for you huh? Thanks for letting us know, and also please advise about your ticket...This is a great learning experience for me and probably others as well re:BC policys...thanks again, and congrats!
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 09:43 pm Post Subject: low tire tread
can I be issued a ticket by the police officer at the scene of the accident I caused , for low tire tread?
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 02:44 am Post Subject:
Yes... it's a safety issue.
Add your comment