Accident
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh
Accident
I know this isn't about my evo/ very good thread, but my fiance got into an accident this week. There were two cars in front of her. The very first one was turning into a gas station very slowly and caused the lady behind him to hit him. My fiance, while recalling the dane cook 'that's awesome' skit hit her brakes and slid (wet roads that are frequented by oil trucks) my civic into the back of this lady. This lady didn't have registration or insurance (PA state) but is claiming she is innocent. I understand that you are responsible for the front of your car, but if this ladys car was not legally allowed to be on the road why the f should it be my fiance's fault?
anyone out there had something simillar happen?
anyone out there had something simillar happen?
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh
i'm not looking for witty comments, I just want to know if anyone has had anything happen. I'm really getting sick of these insurance ppl calling and telling me some bs about how regist. and inspection doesn't matter. why the crap do we need them then?
Evolving Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
From: Tucson, AZ
Because you are required to
the reason you are at fault is because your fiance was not following at a proper distance or was not paying good enough attention to avoid the accident.
Whether or not the person she hit has insurance has nothing to do with who is at fault. Tell your fiance to pay better attention and follow at a safe distance to avoid stuff like this.
the reason you are at fault is because your fiance was not following at a proper distance or was not paying good enough attention to avoid the accident.
Whether or not the person she hit has insurance has nothing to do with who is at fault. Tell your fiance to pay better attention and follow at a safe distance to avoid stuff like this.
Because you are required to
the reason you are at fault is because your fiance was not following at a proper distance or was not paying good enough attention to avoid the accident.
Whether or not the person she hit has insurance has nothing to do with who is at fault. Tell your fiance to pay better attention and follow at a safe distance to avoid stuff like this.
the reason you are at fault is because your fiance was not following at a proper distance or was not paying good enough attention to avoid the accident.
Whether or not the person she hit has insurance has nothing to do with who is at fault. Tell your fiance to pay better attention and follow at a safe distance to avoid stuff like this.
she was traveling too close and/or fast for the conditions;
she was not paying attention to the road/traffic conditions;
the insurance/registration status of the struck vehicle is not an issue in this accident. They may be cited for failure to carry proper paperwork; but that does not change the fact that SHE caused the damage to the vehicles.
OP: I know it sucks, I hear your arguments and concerns and I agree with them on a utopian level. But, that is our legal system.
Last edited by SASD209; Jul 13, 2007 at 11:26 PM.
Trending Topics
it's not always that simple. If there is a drunk driver sitting at a traffic light and you rear end him ("doing 80" lol 
) I am pretty sure it's still their fault. Also, did anyone try blaming the guy in front? haha
) I am pretty sure it's still their fault. Also, did anyone try blaming the guy in front? haha
similar situation happened to my friend, it was on a snow covered road so conditions were even worse but ultimately he was still at fault..and insurance reg isn't gonna matter...sucks but thats how thing are
Well her prior insurance company can be sued since they should report a non-insured to DMV and in turn DMV puts out a suspension notice if the driver does not turn in the uninsured plates.
Also maybe she should have gotten the other 2 drivers since it was a chain of event causing the accident. Very trivial and as we all know insurance companies are crooks. They want their money on time every month but as soon as you try to get money from them they act cheap or find then faults in your story to give you a percentage and make you sign a liability to get a fraction of the money for damages...it suck. Sorry to hear that hope it helps.
Also maybe she should have gotten the other 2 drivers since it was a chain of event causing the accident. Very trivial and as we all know insurance companies are crooks. They want their money on time every month but as soon as you try to get money from them they act cheap or find then faults in your story to give you a percentage and make you sign a liability to get a fraction of the money for damages...it suck. Sorry to hear that hope it helps.
By hitting the car in front of her, the lady without ins and reg is prima facia at fault for the first accident. It is her burden of proof to show that the car in front caused the accident, which under your description can not be shown. She may try to say your fiance' hit her causing her to strike the first vehicle, which would suck for you if you have low limits on your insurance. Your fiance' is prima facia at fault for hitting the lady in front of her. Having no registration, insurance is not evidence to prove that your wife was not at fault for striking the vehicle in front of her.
You have recourse. You can make it known to your insurance co. and the first car's insurance company that your fiance was not at fault for the first collision and have them fight any claims by the first car that was damaged by the car w/o insurance. Either way, your insurance rates will probably increase.
You have recourse. You can make it known to your insurance co. and the first car's insurance company that your fiance was not at fault for the first collision and have them fight any claims by the first car that was damaged by the car w/o insurance. Either way, your insurance rates will probably increase.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post