Car Accident - NSW Road Rules

[ss_11000]

Hey guys and gals.

Dad and I are having a little argument about the person at fault in a car 'incident' . (note that this hasnt happened to us...yet, touch wood)

Scenario - in NSW. Dog runs out in front of a car "A" and the car then breaks heavily. A car "B" following car "A" has then ran up the back of the car "A".
Who is at fault:? "A" or "B"


IMO - Car "B" is at fault because it ran up the back of car "A" who had a legitimite reason to break. The fact that "B" has crashed also implies it was driving dangerously because it did not allow enough time to safely break in an emergency.

So, whats your opinon on this?

[DavidG]

B is at fault.
Neg driving, insufficient space in front to avoid an accident.

[DuncanH]

Yeah B is at fault, not leaving a wide enough gap between the car in front.

[ss_11000]

Ta guys. :2tsup:

[Pat]

Car "B". As detail above. I drive 1 tonne ute with a big steel box for work so I give myself a fair bit of breaking room, not that the idiots in Sydney recognise that, they continuly "drop in" to my breaking room. You are supposed to have about 3 second gap at suburban speeds. I try to double that to give me a buffer and it has worked. Alng the Prince's Hwy one morning everyone moving along at about 70, about 6 cars in front are involved in a nose to tail. Me having the spacea and time to react stopped when I saw the first puff of smoke from the front of the line.

It may be law to keep a reasonable gap, but it is also good common sense:cool:

[Rattrap]

I also say car B. The car behind is always in the wrong. However it should be noted that car A can also be in trouble for dangerious driving for breaking suddenly to avoid the dog. Serious. The law ain't an animal lover!

[jmk89]

I also say car B. The car behind is always in the wrong. However it should be noted that car A can also be in trouble for dangerious driving for breaking suddenly to avoid the dog. Serious. The law ain't an animal lover!

That is true. B clearly is at fault for failing to keep a proper distance and/or a proper lookout. A can also be at fault at least for proper lookout. My grandfather, who was a Supreme Court judge,advised my father and me that you shoud never swerve for anything smaller than a child.

[Lignin]

Car "B" is supposed to be at a safe distance behind the car in front, BUT, if both owners can find the owner of the dog, they would have a case against him as dogs (and all animals) must be under control except in areas with unfenced roads,which must be advertised as such.:no::no:

[Jim Carroll]

You will allways find that the insurance company will also lay blame to car A for not taking appropraite evasive action so as to avoid B from hitting them so they apply the 75/25 rule

No one is fully to blame so they share the blame between the 2 drivers. B 75% A 25% watch your premiums change the next year.

It is always worth knowing who is and how close the driver behind you is. Beign a motorbike rider makes you more aware on the road for situations like this.

A couple of years ago I was blamed for sitting at a red light and got shunted from behind, their insurance company treid to put the blame on me saying if I was not there it would not have happened, so where did they expect me to be when I am sitting at a red light, the lady in question was very well to do and was using her influence but in the end it did not work.

[corbs]

Short answer... car B, correct answer is the owner of the dog.

Had an incident on the farm years ago where a fence got knocked down, Dad put out signs saying livestock on the road while waiting to fix the fence. A car hit one of the sheep and tried to get Dad for the damage to his car however as he had put out the warning signs it covered his duty of care. Without the signs, the liability would have been on Dad as he was aware of the stock out but did not warn others.

[ss_11000]

thanx guys for all your input:2tsup: so the answer is car B is at fault but some of the blame can go to car A , unless they(AorB) can find the owner of the dog in which case its their fault. yeah?


you shoud never swerve for anything smaller than a child.
my dad actually said something similar last night.

does anyone else do this...

[corbs]

I swerve when I see cats:;

[RETIRED]

I swerve when I see cats:;Lining them up?:roll:

[Sturdee]

I swerve when I see cats:;

So I can hit them. :D.


The owner of the dog is at fault and the insurance company of B will sue that person for the damage together with Car A. The insurance company of car A will sue car B and the owner of the dog.

Final result will be that the two insurance companies will join forces to get the owner of the dog to pay.


Peter.

[Rattrap]

Wallabies are my problem. I swear, they're dumber than sheep. The number of times i've slowed down while passing 1 on the side of the road only to have the dumb critter panic & run right into my side door! I hate running over them but sometimes you can't help it & i'm glad that theres so little traffic about cuse sometimes i takeup the whole of the road when it happens.