[TNLady30]

Three cars were involved in a collision on an icy road. Car 1 hit his brakes to avoid another car in front of him. Car 2 hit her brakes but slid into Car 1. I am Car 3. I see them collide and move to the next lane over to avoid a collision, but when Car 2 hits Car 1, she slides sideways into my lane and ends up facing the wrong way (at a slight angle) in my lane. I try to stop, but I cannot and the front of my car hits the back driver's side of her car - not the back bumper, above the wheel well on the back wheel. I had not filed an insurance claim when HER insurance agent called me, asked me what body shop I wanted to use, and told me to take my car in to get fixed. Three days later, he calls back to tell me the claim was contested, she said I hit her from behind, and they will not pay. Who is at fault, and should I sue in small claims court for all or part of the damages? Does the fact that her insurance company contacted me first imply that she was at fault? The police issued no citations to anyone due to the icy weather and the fact that no one was speeding.

[progunr]

By your own admission, you were "behind" these other vehicles, and sounds like you may have been traveling too fast for the current road conditions, as were the other two vehicles as well.

I think you would have a hard time winning this as they will argue that had you been at a safe distance from the other cars, taking the condition of the slick roads, you would have been able to avoid the collision.

I could very well be wrong, so, good luck to you!

[ScottGem]

I actually disagree with Progunr. Normally, a rear collision does mean the rear ender is at fault. But there is a mitigating factor. You were not in the same lane. The fact that the car skidded across the lane boundaries may be enough to show it wasn't your fault. On the flip side, they may claim that you should have stopped rather than try and go around.

In a case like this, you should put in a claim to your insurer and let them handle determining liability.

[JudyKayTee]

I actually disagree with Progunr. Normally, a rear collision does mean the rear ender is at fault. But there is a mitigating factor. You were not in the same lane. The fact that the car skidded across the lane boundaries may be enough to show it wasn't your fault. On the flip side, they may claim that you should have stopped rather than try and go around.

In a case like this, you should put in a claim to your insurer and let them handle determining liability.

Scott is 100% on! High fiving Scott!

And, yes, rear end collisions are no longer a cut and dried matter. Many considerations apply.

And, yes, in my area the argument on their side would be if you see an accident on an icy road, stop, don't try to go around, change lanes, whatever, because you are assumed to know that anything can happen once they start to slip and slide.

This is a matter for your insurance company to handle. I trust you have now reported it and they aren't going to claim they aren't responsible because it wasn't timely reported.

Sounds like a little bit of negligence on everyone's fault - and I realize in that one split second you have to decide what to do and sometimes it's not the best thing to do, just what you instinctively do first so I'm not putting any blame on you.

As far as her insurance company contacting you first and that suggesting negligence on her part - no, it's part of the bigger insurance game.

(You may have made a mistake by giving a statement to her insurance company because, trust me, they aren't going to use it nor was it focused on proving you were right and she was wrong. However, the truth and facts are what they are. Let them fight it out and if you feel wronged, then go to Small Claims Court.)

[Fr_Chuck]

Well I guess you don't want me to be the police officer who was writing that accident report.

Yes you would be held liable. The fact you could not stop, sorry about the ice but it is called "too fast for conditions" and / or "following too closely"
Those would be the tickets that car 2 and 3 would have gotten if any accident investigator I know ( as taught in GA POST training)

So while car 2 may have some level of liblity, you may not be 100 percent liable for paying damage to their car, they may have a small percent to pay for your car. So your main concern would be are they planning on making a claim with your car insurance.

Your best bet, turn it over to your car insurance and let them fight it out.

[MOWERMAN2468]

Well folks, this will be fought out in between the insurance companies it sounds like to me.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yep and that is why there are two different attorneys, each telling thieir client they have great case and will win.

[insuranceconsult]

It's a question of who had control... the other party in front of you obviously failed to maintain control of the vehicle colliding with Car 1. If you managed to avoid the accident by switching lanes cautiously, maintained control of your vehicle, I think you may be free of liability. Especially if the other party slid into your lane that you were occupying after the lane change. If you can answer those questions confidently and there are no witnesses to prove that you were out of control at the time of the lane change or impact with your vehicle, you have a strong case of no liability.

The question is, if Car 2 had not hit the vehicle in front of them and had maintained control of the vehicle, and you made a controlled lane change, the accident never would have happened. But because of the actions of Car 2, you collided with Car 2 who entered your lane. If this went into arbitration and I was on the panel, I would find you with little liability if any.

The other insurance company calling you first did not lead to any detrimental reliance, thus, you have no argument of the other company claiming fault or accepting liability.