全 59 件のコメント

[–]jaspervalQuality Contributor 30ポイント31ポイント  (12子コメント)

You're at fault because you hit a stationary object. So if a car broke down and stopped in the middle of the road, you think that you should be allowed to plow into the back of it with no repercussions? You have a responsibility to drive at a safe speed which allows you to stop and avoid object and debris in the road, whether that is a person, a deer, or an illegally parked car.

[–]s-dubya 17ポイント18ポイント  (13子コメント)

Because you are not supposed to out drive your headlights when it's dark.

[–]rukuus 16ポイント17ポイント  (11子コメント)

Because you are supposed to be aware of hazards in the road. You are responsible for avoiding a non-moving object.

[–]plugmefulloholes 9ポイント10ポイント  (11子コメント)

Because it was a stationary object that you should have seen and avoided. All sorts of things are where they shouldn't be on the road - cars, animals, bikes, children, debris - and it is the driver's responsibility to be alert for and avoid them. Which isn't to say the illegal parker may not share some responsibility, but I agree with the insurance company.

By the same logic, if you aren't made to pay for this, what's to stop you from hitting stationary objects in the future?

[–]jarvitz2[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (10子コメント)

So if I leave my cell phone or computer or something in the middle of the road and someone runs over it is am allowed for file a claim and get it replaced because they hit a stationary object?

[–]rukuus 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

No. You placed it in there.

[–]jarvitz2[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (8子コメント)

So in this case, her car is a phone. What is the difference between the 2 scenarios other than the object hit. Why is one the drives fault and not the other? It's the same thing with different objects. Maybe my computer is worth more than my car

[–]Kelv37Quality Contributor 13ポイント14ポイント  (7子コメント)

A cell phone is not an object which can reasonably be seen while driving. Another car is.

[–]jarvitz2[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (6子コメント)

Not withno visibility and it being dark as hell.

[–]taylorcatz 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Then you were going to fast for the road conditions.

[–]reddituser1211 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is really your fundamental misunderstanding of how this matter is evaluated. You are expected to account for and operate safely in the midst of whatever driving conditions are present. Dark. Rain. Snow. Ice.

The existence of challenging conditions does not change your responsibility to avoid collisions. It changes your responsibility with respect to how you operate the vehicle. In this case the responsibility is to not outdrive the illumination of your headlights.

[–]Kelv37Quality Contributor 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

You should be able to see objects in the dark because you have your headlights on. If you can't react then you are going too fast.

[–]GoonCommaThe 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

So now you're telling us you were driving without headlights?

[–]jarvitz2[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, her headlights were off and she was like next to her car in the yard or some shit.

[–]GoonCommaThe 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And? Why weren't you paying attention to the road?

[–]craftycarnivalzombie 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Literally nothing matters other than the fact that you hit a stationary object. Congrats, you're at fault. We didn't decide the very sensible laws, stop yelling at us for telling you what's going to happen. Would you rather be surprised?

[–]Lehk 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm surprised you weren't ticketed [careless driving, too fast for conditions, failure to exercise due care ...]

[–]blacksoulo 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

HOW AM SUPPOSED TO FEEL CARS IN THE DARK????! is the OP a diabetic by any chance? gotta eat fresh in the am fam!

[–]darpaconger 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I did something very similar. I lost.

[–]SabrinaFaire 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

IANAL, I work in insurance but not property insurance. I think that you would be at fault for your damage, and likely the other driver would be at fault for their own for being illegally parked. Though in fact her insurance might even refuse to pay a claim on hers, and yours might as well.

[–]jarvitz2[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The reason I made this thread is because my insurance says they are going to pay for hers at a reduced cost. This will probably increase my rates as a result. I would be fine if they came to that conclusion and I didn't pay for her car. However I feel like this is worse for me. I do not know all the legal details and I wish I did and how the rates would be affected.

[–]GoonCommaThe 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your insurance rates are increasing because you are an unsafe driver and likely to cost your insurance company more money.

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)