We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Advice needed - collision...
Comments
-
Though you need to remember that the 'but for' test relates to causation, and a negligent act must be established before causation is even an issue. In that regard, the OP has stated that she did not perform an emergency stop. The scenario that she describes is actually quite common, and from the events that she has described it seems entirely reasonable to me that she would brake as she didn't think that there was sufficient room for her vehicle to move through the gap. In those circumstances I can't see there being an allegation of negligence against the OP here.alistair.long wrote: »Do you think it would be fair to do a emergency brake in this senario.
using "but for test" but for the driver infront not stoped the driver behind would not have stopped suddenly also."MIND IF I USE YOUR PHONE? IF WORD GETS OUT THATI'M MISSING FIVE HUNDRED GIRLS WILL KILL THEMSELVES."0 -
Do you think it would be fair to do a emergency brake in this senario.
The OP did not say they did an emergency stop and confirmed that they did not in post#7.
But if they did (whether for a person, dog, oncoming traffic etc.) then they are within their rights to do so and if someone drives into them from behind then it is the fault of the person behind.
I agree with you theorectically that someone could be negligent when doing an emergency stop.
In practice however people rarely do it without a very good reason, so 99 times out of 100 it's the fault of the person behind.
There are always exceptions - for example there is a scam where someone pulls in front of you and slams on their brakes and all occupants claim for whiplash injuries via bent doctors and solicitors.
This does however seem to be your normal run of the mill driving too close.0 -
I seem to have caused a bit of a debate...
For those who are interested, I haven't heard a peep from the gentleman I gave my number to so far.
I did send a complaint to the delivery firm, complete with annotated Google Map images of how badly parked the vehicle was. Whilst it wasn't their drivers fault, I did feel that the driver could benefit from a reminder of a couple of clauses from the Highway Code. Afterall if nobody points it out, he could be parking awfully all over the county and actually contribute to a serious accident next time.
I am yet to receive a response but I'm interested to hear what the company may say.0 -
appologies the third OP did say she did slow down, so in this senario you will have to see what others say. less likly to be OP's fault.0
-
If you were not involved ? why are you trying to get involved ? car insurance not expensive enough or something ? I would zip it before the van company notice a scratch or dent that was not there before...Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards