Crash >_<

[wagon]

I was in a three car crash about three months ago

A cooner pulled across the road the two cars in front of me stopped but i hit the corrolla and pushed that into a pug.

Was hardly any damage to mine ofr the pug the corolla had moderate both ends.

I believed i am responsible for the whole cost, buit i have also been told that ony the rear of the car that i hit is my problem as they should have left enough room.

Any ideas,

Cheers

Wagon

[AzzurrA]

there was a thread about this very scenario the other day on another forum... PerformanceForums i believe...

have a look around there in the 'general' section i think it was.

might have to go back around 5 or 6 pages tho?

[wagon]

cool, cheers

[Bec]

The way I understand it is that you are only responsible for the damage you caused to the car directly in front of you.

If they ran into someone else, then they pay for that damage.

Might be best to call your insurance company and ask them - will be cleared up in no time.

[Blitz]

Unfortunately, if you hit the car in front of you, you are at-fault.

It doesnt matter what the reason was for the car in front of you stopping unexpectedly, but if you rear end it, your insurance is liable.

[Ant97GTR]

It is my understanding that you are responsible for the whole accident if everyone else managed to stop without hitting something.

The fact that they didn't hit anything when they emergency braked means they did have enough room between cars to stop in time and the fact that you then hit them means YOU didn't.

Anyway it would be best to speak to the insurance company involved.

Cheers

[Lukaz]

when you say pulled across the road to you mean on a main road and the corolla went into the middle of the road?

Because there is only ment to be one car there at a time, if theres 2 its called "turning two-abreast" and it's illegal for the second car to be there.

[mid life crisis]

i had this happen to me a few yrs ago. a bloke cut me off and run into the car that was in front of me i then run into the back of the bloke that cut me off if ya follow where im comming from . end result my insurence had to pay for the whole lot even tho there was a wittness who backed my story of been cut off .all the police said sorry mate it happens .your the last one on the line the bills yours

[xRHETTx]

THis happened to me a few years ago too, but i was the car in front. You are responsible for the damage to both cars as long as the car in the middle had stopped before you hit them.

That is, if you pushed them into the front car, its all your fault. But if they ran into the front car first then you ran into the middle car, you are only responsible for the middle car's damage.

Well thats how the RACV saw the matter.

[saff_cossie]

From my understanding very little will get you out of a rear end shunt where your car hits the one in front. Faulty brake lights, no signal etc are all deemed as you driving too close in all cases I have seen.

Where one car shunts another and in turn another, again my understanding and experience (not personally) is each car that hit the one in front pays. So if I have read this correctly, you wouldnt pay for the damage to the pug but to the corolla.

HTH

[VSPEC-33]

  saff_cossie said:

From my understanding very little will get you out of a rear end shunt where your car hits the one in front. Faulty brake lights, no signal etc are all deemed as you driving too close in all cases I have seen.

Where one car shunts another and in turn another, again my understanding and experience (not personally) is each car that hit the one in front pays. So if I have read this correctly, you wouldnt pay for the damage to the pug but to the corolla.

HTH

I was in a similar accident a couple of years ago. I pulled up fine, moderate braking nothing out of control like slamming on the brakes. The car behind me pulled up fine. The third car however didnt. They hit the car behind me, and pushed it into mycar. The third person was responsible for all the damage and it went through their insurance.

The simple way to look at it is, if that third car wasnt there the wouldnt have been an accident. The second car shouldnt have to pay when they hit me, because if the car behind them didnt crash into them , there was no damage caused.

If the second car had hit me, then the third car had hit the second a totally diffent outcome would occur, and it a gets a little harder to sort out.

[WazR32GTSt]

the problem is trying to prove what happened, as everyone is going to have a different story

unfortunately if that is the case, the person at the back will end up copping the blame for all 3 cars..

[Passage31]

Try sorting out a 5 car pile up!

Took 6mths to get money out of the other the insurers for just a rear bumper

Just be very careful when wording your police and insurance reports. Insurers love to shift blame.

[scheris]

Same thing happened to me yrs ago but i was the second car. My mum has a friend in insurance and from what i was told, whoever is at the rear of the 'pile up' is responsible, regardless of some wanker who can't drive cutting u off or doing illegal bs u-turns(cause of my accident). Even with eyewitness and rego num, legally you cannot prove it was the reckless driver who caused unless you got it on video (seriously how stupid is that?!). So i think you might end up brunting the cost of all the repairs on the other cars and urs. It's f*ked up but I've learned to stay as far away from ppl as possible. Never trust anyone on the road!