Anyone ever been rear-ended?

[Bur14Kes17]

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

You should acquaint yourself with BC driving laws and ICBC protocol 

 

The best you could hope for when rear ending someone is 75% your fault 25% their fault

 

Again.  negligent driving is ALWAYS the fault of the eprson who rear ends a person except in very extreme circumstances.

 

http://www.icbc.com/claims/determine-fault/Documents/rear-end.pdf

 

http://www.icbcclaiminfo.com/node/27

 

http://www.icbc.com/claims/determine-fault/Pages/Assessing-fault-in-a-crash.aspx

 

Just to clarify again.

If your smart enough to go find those links then you should be smart enough to understand that I'm not disagreeing with you that ICBC will rule the rear ender is at fault. What you obviously don't understand though is that you can "counter sue" under these extreme circumstances. 

OP is a complete idiot for stopping for absolutely not reason in the middle of what I assume is a busy street since he said it was two lanes wide, because he wanted to talk to someone and see if they were ok and whoever rear ended him has just cause to sue him. That's why in my original post I mentioned the woman in Quebec who was charged with manslaughter for stopping in the middle of a road for no reason other then to help some ducks across the street, and was then rear ended. 

It was a bone head idiot move 

[D.B Cooper]

14 minutes ago, Tre Mac said:

Lots of vehicles make sudden stops, the rear ender was either driving too fast for the conditions or straight up not paying attention.  Both parties are somewhat at fault here, but you have to be a moron to get mad at someone you just drove into.  If I was the op and some dick started spazzing out at me for his mistake I'd ask him how he plans on chewing his next meal after I knock his teeth out. 

Well lucky for me not everybody out there is as tough as you big guy

[Angry Goose]

Ah driving.  It's the best of times and the worst of times

[Angry Goose]

Also, just curious what other people's road rage experiences have been?  I once pulled up to a four way intersection at the same time as a motor cycle, and because I was on his right side he should have yielded right of way to me.  Instead he took off, grinned and fingered me.  So I followed him up to the next light, got out of the car and punched him in the head (with his helmet on).  

 

Dumb move to get out of the car and potentially get caught for assault, but hey, sometimes you gotta take matters into your own hands

[riffraff]

29 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Also, just curious what other people's road rage experiences have been?  I once pulled up to a four way intersection at the same time as a motor cycle, and because I was on his right side he should have yielded right of way to me.  Instead he took off, grinned and fingered me.  So I followed him up to the next light, got out of the car and punched him in the head (with his helmet on).  

 

Dumb move to get out of the car and potentially get caught for assault, but hey, sometimes you gotta take matters into your own hands

 

[Warhippy]

13 hours ago, CanuckNut4Life said:

Today I was headed to the movies with a few friends and was driving on a 2 lane road. I noticed up ahead that there was a car in the left lane with a flat tire and a guy standing beside his vehicle. I decided to slow down and stop and ask him if he was ok. ( Being a good samaritan). All of a sudden I hear this horn and smack. I get rear ended. 

 

Thinking back I know I probably shouldn't have completely stopped in the middle of the street.

 

2 hours ago, Bizarre said:

 

Have you ever heard of defensive driving? Just because you're not at fault does not mean what you did was right. Perhaps the OP should have looked in his mirrors to scan the surroundings before stopping. His post implies there was not a lot of time between when he stopped and when he was hit. 

 

we need more details to know what the speed limit on the road was but it does not sound like this was a resedential/low speed area.

 

Go ask a driving instructor/police officer if they would suggest stopping in the middle of a road to talk to someone. My guess is they would suggest pulling in front/behind the person. 

 

The OP demonstrated a lack of common/road sense during the situation. Neither the OP or the rear-ender are the type of driver I would like to encounter on the road.

 

1 hour ago, Bur14Kes17 said:

If your smart enough to go find those links then you should be smart enough to understand that I'm not disagreeing with you that ICBC will rule the rear ender is at fault. What you obviously don't understand though is that you can "counter sue" under these extreme circumstances. 

OP is a complete idiot for stopping for absolutely not reason in the middle of what I assume is a busy street since he said it was two lanes wide, because he wanted to talk to someone and see if they were ok and whoever rear ended him has just cause to sue him

Note the OP stated he SLOWED DOWN

 

Thus giving ANYONE behind him time to notice and slow down.

 

The laws and insurance claim statutes are VERY clear on this.  

 

While stopping in the middle of the road was beyond questionable without  hazards on.  BC laws, ICBC claim torts and counter suits all dictate that the person who rear ended was at fault, that the person who did the hitting needs to show without proof and doubt that they had 0 time to slow down.  Then they have to prove that

 

A:  They are not speeding

B:  Following to closely

C:  Unable to safely avoid the slowing down and then completely stopped vehicle.

 

Amazingly, under BC's new laws in the event of a suit or counter suit I can demand your phone records to prove you were not texting or using your device.  I can also have your vehicle inspected on your dime to prove that it is/was in sound working condition and able to stop.  I can also request your maintenance schedule to further prove my case.

 

Was stopping in the middle of the road the wrong thing?  Sure why not.  But is a vehicle stopped on the shoulder a pre-existing safety issue?  Yes, thus giving the OP plenty of reason to slow down 

 

Rail all you want, be mad be angry make statements about counter suits and so on and so forth. At days end if you rear end someone

 

You

Are

At

Fault 

[Gurn]

Talk to a doctor

Talk to a lawyer

Check to see if any stores or businesses have  a camera that might have recorded the crash.

Do NOT be a hero, if you are hurt say so. Let ICBC talk to your lawyer, not to you, tell icbc you are not feeling up to dealing with them on your own, at this time.. ICBC tries to represent everyone, your lawyer will represent you.

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

In the UK the rear ender is always considered to be at fault. They need to maintain a safe distance in order to be able to react to anything that happens in front of them. If they can't do that then they are at fault.

 

Doesn't sound like the OP came to a sudden stop either, which makes the rear ender even worse.

[Bizarre]

19 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

Note the OP stated he SLOWED DOWN

 

Thus giving ANYONE behind him time to notice and slow down.

 

The laws and insurance claim statutes are VERY clear on this.  

 

While stopping in the middle of the road was beyond questionable without  hazards on.  BC laws, ICBC claim torts and counter suits all dictate that the person who rear ended was at fault, that the person who did the hitting needs to show without proof and doubt that they had 0 time to slow down.  Then they have to prove that

 

A:  They are not speeding

B:  Following to closely

C:  Unable to safely avoid the slowing down and then completely stopped vehicle.

 

Amazingly, under BC's new laws in the event of a suit or counter suit I can demand your phone records to prove you were not texting or using your device.  I can also have your vehicle inspected on your dime to prove that it is/was in sound working condition and able to stop.  I can also request your maintenance schedule to further prove my case.

 

Was stopping in the middle of the road the wrong thing?  Sure why not.  But is a vehicle stopped on the shoulder a pre-existing safety issue?  Yes, thus giving the OP plenty of reason to slow down 

 

Rail all you want, be mad be angry make statements about counter suits and so on and so forth. At days end if you rear end someone

 

You

Are

At

Fault 

Never once did I state the OP was at fault, I just questioned his driving IQ. Of course he slowed down before he stopped, it's physically impossible to do otherwise. He stated he slowed down and "stopped".

 

No one has said the OP should not have slowed down, you should slow down if someone is pulled over and stopped in the lane beside you. It would be irresponsible to do anything else. Someone/thing could be walking in front of that car and crossing the street. The OP seemed to deduce from further back that was unlikely though as he could tell they had a flat tire. 

 

I have some fun first hand experience of a rear end accident. About 7 years ago I was at a red light in New West when a van rammed into me. I got out of my car and talked to the guy (who was on his cell phone at the time). I got his information and he did not want mine. I was going onto the highway and got off at the next exit. I was unaware but he apparently was behind me somewhere. He pulled off to the side and called the cops. He filed a police report that I had cut him off and slammed on the breaks.

 

ICBC being the scum that they're tried to make the accident 50/50. They claimed he had a police report, and since they couldn't figure out what story was true it would be 50/50. I successfully (obviously) was able to argue that a police report doesn't mean anything (unless the officer witnessed the accident). I had to threaten lawyers and after a few hours of back and forth they finally backed off.

 

I am sure everyone is aware, but never expect the obvious outcome from ICBC ;).

[Alflives]

36 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

Note the OP stated he SLOWED DOWN

 

Thus giving ANYONE behind him time to notice and slow down.

 

The laws and insurance claim statutes are VERY clear on this.  

 

While stopping in the middle of the road was beyond questionable without  hazards on.  BC laws, ICBC claim torts and counter suits all dictate that the person who rear ended was at fault, that the person who did the hitting needs to show without proof and doubt that they had 0 time to slow down.  Then they have to prove that

 

A:  They are not speeding

B:  Following to closely

C:  Unable to safely avoid the slowing down and then completely stopped vehicle.

 

Amazingly, under BC's new laws in the event of a suit or counter suit I can demand your phone records to prove you were not texting or using your device.  I can also have your vehicle inspected on your dime to prove that it is/was in sound working condition and able to stop.  I can also request your maintenance schedule to further prove my case.

 

Was stopping in the middle of the road the wrong thing?  Sure why not.  But is a vehicle stopped on the shoulder a pre-existing safety issue?  Yes, thus giving the OP plenty of reason to slow down 

 

Rail all you want, be mad be angry make statements about counter suits and so on and so forth. At days end if you rear end someone

 

You

Are

At

Fault 

What if you are rear ended, and the force of the crash cause you to rear end the car in front of you?  Are you at fault, because you rear ended someone?  Will you have to prove all the things you pointed out in your post, at your own expense?

[Warhippy]

8 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What if you are rear ended, and the force of the crash cause you to rear end the car in front of you?  Are you at fault, because you rear ended someone?  Will you have to prove all the things you pointed out in your post, at your own expense?

As was pointed out earlier, no.  That is still the fault of the initial point of contact, or first hit.  As such if you are rear ended and rear end someone , you get an act of god while the initial party pays the whole shebang

[Bizarre]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What if you are rear ended, and the force of the crash cause you to rear end the car in front of you?  Are you at fault, because you rear ended someone?  Will you have to prove all the things you pointed out in your post, at your own expense?

 

This is one of the most difficult situations, it can go either way. Technically you're supposed to leave enough room that you won't be pushed into the car in front of you. Depending on the speed you're hit (as well as other factors) sometimes that rule is bent.

[Bizarre]

Just now, Warhippy said:

As was pointed out earlier, no.  That is still the fault of the initial point of contact, or first hit.  As such if you are rear ended and rear end someone , you get an act of god while the initial party pays the whole shebang

This is not accurate, it can still be your fault if you rear end someone else in front of you. Might want to go educate yourself on the topic.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Bizarre said:

 

This is one of the most difficult situations, it can go either way. Technically you're supposed to leave enough room that you won't be pushed into the car in front of you. Depending on the speed you're hit (as well as other factors) sometimes that rule is bent.

This is why Alf drives a scooter, and stays on the sidewalks.  

[Bizarre]

Just now, Alflives said:

This is why Alf drives a scooter, and stays on the sidewalks.  

Where I live they're often the most dangerous. Scooters/Mopeds in Bike lanes... 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Bizarre said:

Where I live they're often the most dangerous. Scooters/Mopeds in Bike lanes... 

My scooter has a top speed of 6 km/hr.  it's an old person scooter.  

[Bizarre]

Just now, Alflives said:

My scooter has a top speed of 6 km/hr.  it's an old person scooter.  

You'll probably be ok then! I see mopeds doing 30-50KM/h in bike lanes, they're not allowed to be in the lane but almost always are.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

11 hours ago, Jägermeister said:

Most of the time the person who does the rear ending is to blame.  This is due to the fact that they must have either been tailgating or not paying attention to actually rear end you.

Totally agree. I mean were they not looking forward judging the distances ?  

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

1 hour ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Also, just curious what other people's road rage experiences have been?  I once pulled up to a four way intersection at the same time as a motor cycle, and because I was on his right side he should have yielded right of way to me.  Instead he took off, grinned and fingered me.  So I followed him up to the next light, got out of the car and punched him in the head (with his helmet on).  

 

Dumb move to get out of the car and potentially get caught for assault, but hey, sometimes you gotta take matters into your own hands

CrazyGoose on the Loose !     sigh...... i have had 2 incidents. One I should have just drove away, the other  well let's just say

 

[Warhippy]

18 minutes ago, Bizarre said:

This is not accurate, it can still be your fault if you rear end someone else in front of you. Might want to go educate yourself on the topic.

Wrong again.  IF you are the person in an accident who is pushed in to another vehicle you are not at majority fault but instead partial fault.  IF you are all completely stopped the secondary point of impact (your vehicle) is at no fault at all

 

Who Is At Fault: In this scenario, the majority of the fault falls on the first driver who started the domino effect of the accident. However, every other driver who struck the car in front of them will also hold some fault in the accident. In a three-car pileup where all three vehicles were in motion at the time of the accident, the driver at the rear may be held 100% at fault by his or her insurance company. In the second collision, the car that struck the lead car may hold 50% of the fault. There are two separate fault determinations made, for the two collisions. It’s important to note that if the two front cars are stopped at the time of impact, only the rear car will face fault. In all cases the car at the front of the line has no fault in the accident.

 

Educationing and all that