Insurance claim advice - two vehicles colliding at low speed

dacouch

arcon5 wrote: »

Well in (9) where A is hit by B who is hit by C i'm a little confused as to why between A and B, B is held 50% liable.

Although these are far from being anything of sunstance! There are many other possibilities which may affect or determine liability!

The standard of B's driving is very poor, his premiums must be astronomical

arcon5

glentoran99 wrote: »

Because B was driving too close to A


Of course their are many variables but its a handy wee guide I thought anyway

Then he should be 100% liable, not 50%

glentoran99

arcon5 wrote: »

Then he should be 100% liable, not 50%

but its only half his fault because someone behind hit him,


I dunno :-)


not gospel but I thought it was good even if you arent in Ontario

Car_54

glentoran99 wrote: »

but its only half his fault because someone behind hit him,


I dunno :-)


not gospel but I thought it was good even if you arent in Ontario

According to Stece Earle there's:

"No judge, no jury, no hangman, no justice in Ontario"