This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

全 58 件のコメント

[–]BiondinaQuality Contributor[M] [スコア非表示] stickied comment (0子コメント)

As a matter of course, people are willing to give legal advice to an OP who isn't tossing out combative remarks left and right. Post is locked, since you received your advice and all.

[–]Hippie-Viking 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (13子コメント)

NAL but here are some responses for your additional information:

1 - They don't need statements because of all the police who saw you. They know the other drivers will testify they were stopped.

2 - Injuries can pop up later. You aren't a doctor and can't possibly know if no one was injured.

3 - So what?

4 - So what?

5 - So what?

It doesn't matter if you think you were going slow enough, if you hit a stationary object you were going too fast. You're 100% at fault.

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (12子コメント)

3 - 5 were for insurance reasons. As for your point, how fast should I have been going then? 10 mph? 5 mph? I think I still would have tapped the car if I was going 3 mph. I want to say again, this is a 60 mph highway I have driven for 6 years, practically daily. Despite the tunnel scaring the living daylights out of me there has never been an issue of stopped cars ever before because its two lanes that open to three. Traffic opens up, it doesn't bottleneck unless a moron purposely blocks traffic which someone did here.

[–]Hippie-Viking 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

So what's your question for this sub? Do you expect people to tell you that you aren't responsible because you were actually driving safely? Good luck with that.

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Check his edit, apparently that's exactly what he expects.

[–]Sarged117[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Crunchwarp_supreme please do not speak for me. I'm not sure what I did to offend you so but whatever it was I apologize. As I said, I know that for insurance reasons SOMEONE has to be liable. I'm just trying to find a way to help dig me out of this hole, not of my making, that I find myself in.

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (5子コメント)

I didn't speak for you, you did that.

[–]Sarged117[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Where did I ever say I wanted someone to tell me I wasn't responsible? I know I'm not responsible ethically or morally, I wanted legal advice to help me illustrate that for insurance purposes.

[–]Hippie-Viking 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm just going to quote a truly great man: "...if you hit a stationary object you were going too fast. You're 100% at fault" - /u/Hippie-Viking, 50 minutes ago.

I'm glad you think you aren't ethically or morally responsible but since this is a legal sub that's the issue. You're at fault. Period. Full stop.

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

"A self made man who admires his creator"

So many jokes to be made but I'll try and keep it civil. As I've said before I was keenly aware I was at fault legally. Why else would someone approach a legal advice page unless they were in legal trouble? But instead of advice in all but two accounts so far I have gotten nothing but people telling me that the sky is indeed blue I.e. stating the glaringly obvious. Didn't your mama ever tell you that if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing at all?

[–]Hippie-Viking 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

When you use your infallible "magical brick wall" defense please record the look on the face of the person you are talking to. We all need to see that.

If you want more responses try MS Paint, this sub loves that.

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Not at all. I was looking for someone to tell me a law, term, clue ANYTHING to help. I'm a college student pursuing a mechanical engineering degree. I know next to zilch about law. All I know is I am now in a position, not of my own making, and I was looking for help to make the best of a bad situation.

[–]Hippie-Viking 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You are going to have a tough time in life if you can't take responsibility for hitting stationary objects with your car. Why are you the only one to have hit other cars if its the same as a magical brick wall popping up?

Your edit is cringe worthy.

[–]Sarged117[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I get a distinct feeling you didn't read the full post (or glossed over it) that I spent quite of bit of time putting in ever detail I could. That last comment was to illustrate the absurdity of the situation I was put in that people are telling me I could have avoided. Thanks for proving my edit right.

[–]MadMonkeyNZ 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Upvoted for lols

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I know right? Wtf happened down here? I'm not sure what I did or how I started it but I apparently ticked quite a few people off.

[–]huevosgrandote 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

You're basically someone who got caught in front of cops stealing and then running to legal advice asking how to get out of it

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Well there's that little issue of "intent" you're overlooking there. Frankly I've seen some spectacular leaps of logic in my time but this one takes the cake.

[–]huevosgrandote 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

No one thinks you did it on purpose. you were negligent. Either way, you are 100% fiscally responsible

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well I wasn't really negligent as if you had actually read the post, I had reduced my speed by 40 mph. 20 mph in a 60 mph zone is the opposite of negligent.

[–]huevosgrandote 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You hit something that wasn't moving you dickwad. It doesn't matter what your sight was. If your sight was 5 feet you should have been going 1mph

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Too long. You should remove all of the unnecessary details and ask a simple question. I read your post despite this; You hit a stationary object while driving. You're responsible.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (10子コメント)

TLDR - I hit a stopped car on a highway I had no way of seeing and no way of avoiding, going 20 mph in a 60 mph zone. My car is totaled. Our insurance rates are going to skyrocket and I'm liable for three cars. All for an accident that I had no part in creating and that I had no way of avoiding and there was nothing I could have done differently.

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (9子コメント)

It sounds like you were driving too fast for conditions and you were unable to stop before hitting the vehicle in front of you. You could have avoided the accident by driving in a safer manner.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

I want to reemphasize this was a highway and I had reduced my speed by 40 mph. There was no traffic and no way of seeing the car till I hit it. I was driving VERY defensively. 7 years of NY driving without an accident should prove that much. When the car (that I hit later) in front of me entered the tunnel they were 40 to 50 feet in front of me.

[–]YourLovelyMan 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Hey dude, two things. One: I'm a lawyer. Two: I was in a similar situation a few years ago--a large car in front of me swerved quickly to avoid a stopped car, and even though I was going at a reduced speed, I still didn't see the stopped car until t was too late.

I didn't think it was fair then. I still don't, in fact, and it's still pretty maddening. But from a legal perspective, they pinned the fault on me.

The reason is that, even though someone else might have negligently stopped or left an obstacle on the road, your not stopping in time is an intervening cause. It's a separate event from the initial negligent act, and it's the event that caused the damage.

Like it or not, that's the formula the police, courts, and insurance companies have to work with. It sucks that you and I were caught in an unfair corner of it where there was nothing we could do to prevent it.

But from a policy perspective it makes sense--we don't want people hitting stationary objects only to claim that they couldn't be avoided. It's too difficult to corroborate, and would leave victims out of luck.

Hopefully this sheds some light.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Thank you for the first actual comment I was looking for. I appreciate it. I know there's no way to prove it but I personally assure you there was no lapse in attention, and I was going very slowly. I guess I'm just looking for a sort of "Innocent until proven guilty" (Yeah I know that really doesn't work for car accidents but I hope you understand what I'm getting at.) Isn't there a term or law to protect people who were following to the letter and beyond all the rules of defensive driving? Doesn't the fact that my airbags didn't even deploy prove how slowly I was going?

[–]YourLovelyMan 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm sure you were driving every bit as cautiously as you say you were. I was too, and my airbags didn't deploy either.

This isn't a criminal law situation. It's not about right and wrong. It's about who should ultimately bear the cost, and if your driving--as cautious as it was--was the intervening cause, the law says you have to bear the cost.

[–]Sarged117[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks. I appreciate it, I really do. I was hopeful someone could tell me a clause or something to help but it was a Hail Mary anyway. If nothing else its good to know that there's nothing to be done. Thanks for the advice.

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

You hit a stationary object. You are entirely at fault.

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

A stationary object, that shouldn't have been there, I had no way of seeing AFTER I had reduced my speed by 40 mph in a 60 mph. Please, clue me in on what other precautions I should have taken.

[–]CRUNCHWARP_SUPREME 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You could've been driving slow enough so that you didn't hydroplane and crash into the back of a stationary object.

Sorry you disagree, but you're wrong.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would have tapped the car if I was going 5 mph. I had less that the length of my car between seeing the car and having to stop. It wasn't a question of speed. Any speed would have been too fast.

[–]gabbeyabbey 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (13子コメント)

I'm not sure you have a question.

That's how insurance works.

Unfortunate situation, but someone has to be at fault and this times it's you. Those other cars were stopped--they aren't at fault. And you have police witnesses.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Well that's just it. I'm not at fault (insurance companies aside). Even the most casual observer can see that. I had no way of even seeing the car until I had less than the length of my car to stop. I was already going 20 mph in a 60 mph zone. Its not like I could have been going slower.

[–]gabbeyabbey 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Even the most casual observer can see that.

Except the cops who actually did see it.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (10子コメント)

I want to say that I respect and treasure our police force but they do make mistakes, such as the officer who began yelling at me for looking at an accident through a brick wall. I didn't even see the accident he was talking about until after I had had my own. I get it, its a job and you just want to get through it but the policeman here was WRONG. I just hope he wasn't the one who wrote it up as he clearly wasn't thinking.

[–]gabbeyabbey 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Ok, well here's the thing: you are at fault. Period. Disagree with it all you want, but that won't change it.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Instead of saying "You are at fault. Period." can someone please tell me where I was driving recklessly? Forget recklessly, how about where I was driving negligently? Barring that can someone tell me how I WASN'T driving defensively with ever precaution I could?

[–]gabbeyabbey 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

In response to your edit, go pound sand. Just because you're not hearing what you want to hear doesn't mean you're not getting legal advice. It means you're wrong.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Telling me I'm at fault is not legal advice. I knew that. That's why I came to the legal advice reddit in the first place.

[–]gabbeyabbey 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

You didn't actually ask a question though so you get what you get. You didn't ask why you were legally at fault you just argued with everyone.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well it was a case of "Hey this bad thing happened that I had no control over it. What can I do?", "You're at fault", "I was looking for a bit more solid advice on what to do moving forward", "You're still at fault".

Really doesn't help anybody now does it?

[–]VALUABLEDISCOURSE 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's been stated about 15 different times already, but if you hit someone from behind, legally it was your fault. People keep saying that, and you immediately come back with a defense that it wasn't your fault. No one is trying to accuse you, they're literally just answering your question. Under the law you are at fault - end of story

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I can see that. I understand I'm at fault legally. I was well aware of that before I posted this, which is why I came to the legal advice reddit in the first place. I came here for any insightful tips, not for seven and counting people to tell me what I already know.

(I appreciate the comment, no sarcasm. I hope that came across.)

[–]gabbeyabbey 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It doesn't matter if someone else can or can't tell you how you're at fault. It doesn't change anything. You are at fault. We weren't there and didn't see anything, but you hit stationary objects--end of story. Welcome to the real world. It sucks, but no one has to explain how you are or aren't at fault because your insurance already made a determination and there's nothing you can do about it.

[–]Sarged117[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Well I appear to have offended several people. Not sure what I ever did to you but I understand. Everyone has a bad day. I'm in the middle of one myself. To clarify, I know LEGALLY I'm at fault.This is why I came to the LEGAL ADVICE reddit. I have had hours of discussion today just how at fault I am with my insurance company. There is no need to tell the metaphorical blind man he can't see. What he does need is someone to lead him the way.

[–]gabbeyabbey 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

No one is offended, there is just a low tolerance here for people who argue. No one is mad and just because they don't agree with you or tell you something you don't want to hear doesn't mean they're offended. You wanted people to lead the way and they did, by telling you that you're at fault and there is nothing you can do in this case. Just because you want some way out of this or to mitigate your damages doesn't mean there is a way, and when people tell you so it doesn't mean they're not giving you legal advice. It just means they're not giving you the legal advice you want to hear.

[–]Sarged117[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You seem rather worked up for someone who isn't mad but whatever. I had no expectations coming here to begin with and even no expectations I was disappointed when the first seven comments were "You're a fault. Period" or variations there of. No kidding, kinda why I'm here. I was hoping for a little more in depth explanation of options moving forward, which I finally got from "YourLovelyMan".

[–]huevosgrandote 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

So if you know you are legally at fault, why are you in this sub? Sounds like you want a shoulder to cry on and not take responsibility for your actions. Go find somewhere else.

And how did the 20 cars in front of you stop in front of the magic brick wall?

Know what to do?

[–]Sarged117[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

The cars in front of me had a lot more space to brake then I did, as cars generally occupy the space they're in meaning every additional car added gave less room to brake than the one before. Even the car in front of me had 10 or so feet more to break. I didn't even think I had to state this, seemed kinda obvious.

[–]huevosgrandote 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

then the next car should be a fender bender, not a total plus 2 car accident

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Ah, I see. You didn't actually read the post, you glossed over it, or something else. Idk. Doesn't really matter. It was a fender bender, and then the car was pushed into the car in front of it. You seem to have a knack for missing the glaringly obvious.

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

fender benders don't get cars totaled you cumstain.

I fell for a troll. I apologize.

In no way is this asswipe an engineering student. Or God help me if I ever drive over a bridge you designed.

[–]Sarged117[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Name calling will get you no where in life I assure you. I can also assure you I am a mechanical engineer but I wouldn't want to drive on one of my bridges too. As for the totaled car, I told you what the mechanic told me. My car was so heavily driven over 232,000 miles that metal fatigue was the enemy, not the impact itself. Explains why the other car had a cracked bumper and I had a warped car.