Insurance / Rear end question

[300havoc]

Just a question when it comes to "At Fault." Before reading further, be aware that I know that rear ending someone is automatically the tail cars fault, with only very few circumstances where it may not be. My situation doesn't fall into those circumstances, so I obviously know I'm at fault.

There is a bit of a blind corner specifically northbound Crowchild trail where the left lane veers onto University Dr NW, and the second left lane has the opportunity to either go left, or continue straight on. If there is a car sitting stopped just past the crest of this turn in the far left hand lane because they didn't move after their own accident with someone else, what fault if any can lie on them for obstructing a lane of traffic? Basically, can someone stop a car unsafely, cause a traffic issue, and then drive off and not have any fault?

Maybe thats a stupid question. Any thoughts?

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just a question when it comes to "At Fault." Before reading further, be aware that I know that rear ending someone is automatically the tail cars fault, with only very few circumstances where it may not be. My situation doesn't fall into those circumstances, so I obviously know I'm at fault.

There is a bit of a blind corner specifically northbound Crowchild trail where the left lane veers onto University Dr NW, and the second left lane has the opportunity to either go left, or continue straight on. If there is a car sitting stopped just past the crest of this turn in the far left hand lane because they didn't move after their own accident with someone else, what fault if any can lie on them for obstructing a lane of traffic? Basically, can someone stop a car unsafely, cause a traffic issue, and then drive off and not have any fault?

Maybe thats a stupid question. Any thoughts?

Unfortunately, virtually none. It's tough to argue that you ran into a stationary object and assign some fault to them because we all should be theoretically driving defensively enough that we can react to avoid crashing into what is essentially a parked car. (Parked like a stupid asshole, sure... But still...) It occupies cubic meters of space and has lights & reflectors on it to help us not smash into it.
"If it's a blind corner, you should've been going slower and been more ready" etc etc.

That's my opinion and I'm sorry, but don't worry! I'm confident several others will chime in with alternate logic and analytical one-offs that will strongly suggest otherwise!

[300havoc]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Unfortunately, virtually none. It's tough to argue that you ran into a stationary object and assign some fault to them because we all should be theoretically driving defensively enough that we can react to avoid crashing into what is essentially a parked car. (Parked like a stupid asshole, sure... But still...) It occupies cubic meters of space and has lights & reflectors on it to help us not smash into it.
"If it's a blind corner, you should've been going slower and been more ready" etc etc.

Oh for sure, should have been going slower and blah is accurate. I won't argue that. I guess I couldn't even call them a "cause" since the cause of accident is still technically me following too close.

[spikerS]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh for sure, should have been going slower and blah is accurate. I won't argue that. I guess I couldn't even call them a "cause" since the cause of accident is still technically me following too close.

Not really. You are not "following too close" but more "Driving with undue care and attention" since you hit a stationary object, whether it is a car/pole/electrical box.

A vehicle can stop pretty much anywhere legally, even in the middle of an intersection if circumstances require it, and it is another motorist's duty to avoid it. Should they have been stopped there if it wasn't the result of a mechanical or medical issue? No, that's a pretty stupid place to stop for just this reason, but they are allowed to. Unfortunately, it is not an offense to be stupid.

[300havoc]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not really. You are not "following too close" but more "Driving with undue care and attention" since you hit a stationary object, whether it is a car/pole/electrical box.

Ah, in my case I hit someone who stopped quickly because of another vehicle stopped in the roadway, sorry it wasn’t more clear.

I guess it’s just good to know that someone can stop pretty much anywhere they want. Seems stupid but I guess that’s that.

[suntan]

No, vehicles cannot stop anywhere they want. They can get a ticket for obstructing traffic.

However, that does not absolve you of fault.

This is a spin on the classic "I rear ended someone because someone rear ended me" use case.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, vehicles cannot stop anywhere they want. They can get a ticket for obstructing traffic.

However, that does not absolve you of fault.

This is a spin on the classic "I rear ended someone because someone rear ended me" use case.

The problem is people think they can if their 4-ways are on - just ask the people that block the arteries out of the DT core almost every day, waiting to pick someone up or whatever. I absolutely hate those people.

[CompletelyNumb]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The problem is people think they can if their 4-ways are on - just ask the people that block the arteries out of the DT core almost every day, waiting to pick someone up or whatever. I absolutely hate those people.

You mean taxis? One of my biggest pet peeves when I lived downtown.

[300havoc]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, vehicles cannot stop anywhere they want. They can get a ticket for obstructing traffic.

However, that does not absolve you of fault.

This is a spin on the classic "I rear ended someone because someone rear ended me" use case.

Interesting. I should have gotten the information of that particular vehicle before they drove off. Oh well, I know for next time.

Good news, Jeeps have a nice solid part under their front bumpers. Bad news, Tuscons do not.

[Masked Bandit]

It's a shitty deal but there's no way out of this. Someone stops in the middle of a busy road (oh, like Crowchild for example) and truly CAUSES a collision in the end it doesn't matter, you hit someone / something from behind you're at fault. Perhaps the stopped vehicle had mechanical problems and didn't CHOOSE to stop in the middle of the road but rather was forced to...that's the reasoning behind it. Sorry OP.