I would like to know who's fault this accident would be in the eyes of a judge. So here the story goes.

There is car A and there is a car B. Car a comes up to a red light and stops. Car A then make a right turn and stops abruptly. Car B is right behind him and also comes up to the red light and stops and make the right turn soon after. But oooooohhhh since car A stopped abruptly, car B taps car A in the bumper.

Now car A is a old 1990 honda and has several dents and is very rusty. Basically looks like the parts will fall off from anything... even a kick... or a flick. Car B has a new BMW.

Who's fault is this and if it is car B's fault, what are the justifications?

Other fact:
*Car A was not stopped after the original stop because he was going to turn. He was to keep going straight.
*Car A stopped as if he was looking to get into a accident.
*I am just a witness, not actually involved in the accident in any way.

Thanks!

First the condition of the car doesn't matter. In most cases Car B would be at fault because the following car has the responsibility to keep a safe distance.

Now, if the driver of Car A has a history of getting into accidents, the driver of Car B can present that as evidence. As a witness your impressions would probably not be admissible.

Car B is at fault, any discussion of types of cars and conditions has nothing to do with this.

A car must not follow so close as he can not stop if something happens in front of him

I agree too, car B also gets a ticket for failure to avoid an accident or tailgating. You can never get so close that you can't stop, its on car B. There are no justifications, only excusses and the judge will have heard them all 100X

I would like to know who's fault this accident would be in the eyes of a judge. So here the story goes.

There is car A and there is a car B. Car a comes up to a red light and stops. Car A then make a right turn and stops abruptly. Car B is right behind him and also comes up to the red light and stops and make the right turn soon after. But oooooohhhh since car A stopped abruptly, car B taps car A in the bumper.

Now car A is a old 1990 honda and has several dents and is very rusty. Basically looks like the parts will fall off from anything...even a kick...or a flick. Car B has a new BMW.

Who's fault is this and if it is car B's fault, what are the justifications?

Other fact:
*Car A was not stopped after the original stop because he was going to turn. He was to keep going straight.
*Car A stopped as if he was looking to get into a accident.
*I am just a witness, not actually involved in the accident in any way.

Thanks!


I'm a liability investigator in NY. Here is how it works "here." (You are asking about what a Judge would decide. Someone was ticketed?)

I'll address the insurance.

The condition of the cars does not matter - you take people as you find them. "Yes, but the car was in bad shape" does not matter. Obviously repairs will cost less on an older car but other than that, nothing to do with the dollar amount of the damage. Maybe my car withstands a hit better than yours. That's immaterial.

Car B did not have his car under his control. I see this with people merging onto expressways all the time. Car #2 THINKS car #1 has pulled into traffic. In fact, Car #1 started to pull away, realized it wasn't safe and braked. He then gets hit in the back. Why? Because #2 wasn't paying attention.

Justifications? Justifications for what? There are no justifications for hitting someone.

I am surprised that a witness (and I talk to witnesses all day, every day) would make a comment that one of the vehicles was looking to cause an accident. Are you sure you're not a party to the action? I say that also based on the condition of the cars. The usual response is, "This guy hit that guy," I saw it and so I'm involved.

I'm a liability investigator in NY. Here is how it works "here." (You are asking about what a Judge would decide. Someone was ticketed?)

I'll address the insurance.

The condition of the cars does not matter - you take people as you find them. "Yes, but the car was in bad shape" does not matter. Obviously repairs will cost less on an older car but other than that, nothing to do with the dollar amount of the damage. Maybe my car withstands a hit better than yours. That's immaterial.

Car B did not have his car under his control. I see this with people merging onto expressways all the time. Car #2 THINKS car #1 has pulled into traffic. In fact, Car #1 started to pull away, realized it wasn't safe and braked. He then gets hit in the back. Why? Because #2 wasn't paying attention.

Justifications? Justifications for what? There are no justifications for hitting someone.

I am surprised that a witness (and I talk to witnesses all day, every day) would make a comment that one of the vehicles was looking to cause an accident. Are you sure you're not a party to the action? I say that also based on the condition of the cars. The usual response is, "This guy hit that guy," I saw it and so I'm involved.
Having worked for State Farm, I totally agree with you (have to spread the rep). "Following too close" is a very common reason for an accident.

Speaking of one of the drivers having an ulterior motive -- I remember a case where two brothers with different last names and insurance companies owned beaters and created a two-car "no-fault" accident, hoping to make some money in order to purchase newer vehicles. It didn't work.