Collision Question !

[RobPhoboS]

Ok well my friend was driving into London, he saw a red light and stopped (fairly quickly), the berk behind us then drove into the back of us. Another friend in the back seat was knocked out by the collision (his face hit the head rest), nothing major for him just a bit out of it for 15mins.
So am I right in thinking that the guy behind us was just too close to aviod hitting us ?

[flemke]

RobPhoboS said:

Ok well my friend was driving into London, he saw a red light and stopped (fairly quickly), the berk behind us then drove into the back of us. Another friend in the back seat was knocked out by the collision (his face hit the head rest), nothing major for him just a bit out of it for 15mins.
So am I right in thinking that the guy behind us was just too close to aviod hitting us ?

The guy behind you could have been far enough back but not paying attention.
His brakes could have been defective.
He could have a medical problem.

In any case, the liability is his.

[fatboy b]

The driver of the car you were in should have glanced in the RVM first to see if it was safe to pull up quickly, but to be fair, berk behind should have been paying more attention. It almost happened to me the other day. Lights started to change, I was all for stopping, but the knob behind has hell-bent on going through, so a split-second choice from me to carry-on stopped me from being rear-ended.

[Dwight VanDriver]

Highway Code

105: Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should

leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall stopping distance .

dvd

[havoc]

Dwight VanDriver said:

The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall stopping distance .

dvd

Very rarely obeyed though.

Nonetheless, simple common sense would say 'stay further away than the 'observation and thinking distance' at your speed...and who here knows that off the top of their head?!?

[julian64]

How did your friend hit his face on the headrest to knock himself out.

If you were hit in the back the impact would have been between back of head and the head rest behind him as a reaction to the impact.

If he hit his face on one of the front headrests its likely this wasn't because of a rear impact but surely the force of your driver friend violently braking causing his head to go forward.

If the second was the case then I would be in with a chance as the driver at the rear to claim against you for your driving.

After all if I'm driving along the motorway and suddenly for no good reason do an emergency brake. I very much doubt bib would be too impressed with letting me off scott free while they blamed all the drivers behind.

[motco]

The rear seat passenger should have been wearing a seatbelt. If he wasn't then any injury he suffered is his liability, surely?

Edited by motco on Wednesday 20th June 17:20

[Peter Ward]

When you see videos of crash dummies, they go all over the place after a collision -- forwards, backwards, up, down. I guess it's possible that the backseat friend was first compressed back into his seat and then flung forwards as the force holding him back was released and he rebounded off the seat backrest springs?

[streaky]

Peter Ward said:

When you see videos of crash dummies, they go all over the place after a collision -- forwards, backwards, up, down. I guess it's possible that the backseat friend was first compressed back into his seat and then flung forwards as the force holding him back was released and he rebounded off the seat backrest springs?

Absolutely! - Streaky

[Slowly Slowly]

motco said:

surely?

Definitely.

[RobPhoboS]

My friend was definately wearing a seat belt, just that there isn't much room in the back of this particular Alfa.
I was just curious because I assume its the guy in the merc behind that wasn't paying attention to the car in front.
Ah well, wonder what will happen.

[streaky]

Slowly Slowly said:

motco said:

surely?

Definitely.

Doesn't the driver have at least joint liability, unless can prove pax advised to belt-up but didn't? "Askin' for info', not statin' for fact" - Streaky

[Mr2Mike]

julian64 said:

If the second was the case then I would be in with a chance as the driver at the rear to claim against you for your driving.

Very doubtful. If the driver behind had been observing the traffic lights then he should already have been slowing down. I think you may have a case if a driver brakes hard for no good reason, but a red light is a good reason to stop. Admittedly the first driver couldn't have been paying much attention if he had to do an emergency stop, but that does not absolve driver behind from not leaving sufficient braking distance.

[WildCat]

Mr2Mike said:

julian64 said:

If the second was the case then I would be in with a chance as the driver at the rear to claim against you for your driving.

Very doubtful. If the driver behind had been observing the traffic lights then he should already have been slowing down. I think you may have a case if a driver brakes hard for no good reason, but a red light is a good reason to stop. Admittedly the first driver couldn't have been paying much attention if he had to do an emergency stop, but that does not absolve driver behind from not leaving sufficient braking distance.

Comes across to me as if neither driver noticed these red lights till too late. I wonder what would have happen if one or both went through on red light & collide with traffic running on green lights?

On plus side - car behind should have allowed space for him to stop in given you both in urban with traffic lights which have nasty habit of changing "all of a sudden"

Pity no red light cam when you need one either Given the number of halfwits I see running red lights - I'd be thinking best place for scamera at all traffic lights (with one specifically designed to nail them cyslists

[motco]

streaky said:

Slowly Slowly said:

motco said:

surely?

Definitely.

Doesn't the driver have at least joint liability, unless can prove pax advised to belt-up but didn't? "Askin' for info', not statin' for fact" - Streaky

AFAIK if the passenger is a child then the driver is responsible. But if an adult is the passenger then it is that person's fine if caught, and by implication, their problem if they're hurt. Source: Met Police officer on R4 some time ago.

As far as the rear-end is concerned, exactly this situation (actually caused by the leading driver suddenly spotting a red-light camera) happened to someone I know - he was the following driver and failed to stop in time - and he was not only held totally liable for all damage, but the 'victim' successfully claimed for whiplash injury as well. The person I know is a medic and reckons there was no chance that the whiplash was real at the sort of impact levels sustained. However, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, "he would say that, wouldn't he?"

[RobPhoboS]

Just to clarify:

It wasn't red for straight on, but red for one of the other turnings. He just saw the red light and stopped just incase, I has just started to say to him 'its ok, its green for us', but I got as far as 'its o'

[flemke]

RobPhoboS said:

Just to clarify:

It wasn't red for straight on, but red for one of the other turnings. He just saw the red light and stopped just incase, I has just started to say to him 'its ok, its green for us', but I got as far as 'its o'

Slight difference, senor!

So you're saying that your friend pulled up for no (legally justifiable) reason, without using an indicator or warning light, in the middle of a flowing carriageway?

[esselte]

flemke said:

RobPhoboS said:

Just to clarify:

It wasn't red for straight on, but red for one of the other turnings. He just saw the red light and stopped just incase, I has just started to say to him 'its ok, its green for us', but I got as far as 'its o'

Slight difference, senor!

So you're saying that your friend pulled up for no (legally justifiable) reason, without using an indicator or warning light, in the middle of a flowing carriageway?

Well just to play DA what would be the difference if he'd stopped for a kid/dog etc running out into the street?The car behind should leave enough distance to be able to stop.All in my opinion obviously.....

[vonhosen]

esselte said:

flemke said:

RobPhoboS said:

Just to clarify:

It wasn't red for straight on, but red for one of the other turnings. He just saw the red light and stopped just incase, I has just started to say to him 'its ok, its green for us', but I got as far as 'its o'

Slight difference, senor!

So you're saying that your friend pulled up for no (legally justifiable) reason, without using an indicator or warning light, in the middle of a flowing carriageway?

Well just to play DA what would be the difference if he'd stopped for a kid/dog etc running out into the street?The car behind should leave enough distance to be able to stop.All in my opinion obviously.....

Is it reasonable to expect someone to do an emergency stop with nothing there to do it for ?

If a child runs out infront of the lead car, it is reasonable to expect them to do an emergency stop.
It's also reasonable in those circumstances to expect the following vehicle to see that & anticipate the emergency braking.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 21st June 21:59

[esselte]

vonhosen said:

esselte said:

flemke said:

RobPhoboS said:

Just to clarify:

It wasn't red for straight on, but red for one of the other turnings. He just saw the red light and stopped just incase, I has just started to say to him 'its ok, its green for us', but I got as far as 'its o'

Slight difference, senor!

So you're saying that your friend pulled up for no (legally justifiable) reason, without using an indicator or warning light, in the middle of a flowing carriageway?

Well just to play DA what would be the difference if he'd stopped for a kid/dog etc running out into the street?The car behind should leave enough distance to be able to stop.All in my opinion obviously.....

Is it reasonable to expect someone to do an emergency stop with nothing there to do it for ?

If a child runs out infront of the lead car, it is reasonable to expect them to do an emergency stop.
It's also reasonable in those circumstances to expect the following vehicle to see that & anticipate the emergency braking.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 21st June 21:59

As I said, I was playing DA......surely you should leave yourself enough room to be able to stop.......It'll probably go for a 50-50..