by Guest » Sun May 31, 2009 11:36 am
Back in March 3, 2008 I was hit by an 18 wheeler truck. The traffic on the beltway was at a stop with back-up. When I got hit my car happened to slid and hit the girl in front of me in which both of our cars were total. The truck driver recieved a citation and I had a witness at the time. We went to court to fight the cause, but lost due to "NO FAULT' of negligence on either party. Now the girl's parents insurance is trying to sue me for the same cause. I don't see how it was my fault when there was no advoidance to hitting her. I need help on this!
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:19 am Post Subject:
Well if the OP will come back and advise the exact circumstances of this hearing he was involved in that would help....must be a PA (state to state ) thing, I handle chain reactions wrecks a lot..and it's never settled this way...as you said, depends on the speed/force and vehicle that hits you...you could be double the required distance behind someone and still get knoced into them....and 'but for' the first idiot, there would be no chain reaction...I certainly don't agree with this...course, the great state of PA forgot to check with me regarding this law too :wink: :roll:
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:55 am Post Subject:
PA is pretty screwed up when it comes to things like this. They could use a revamp of their entire system. Nothing like driving safe and watching the road only to have some idiot ram you and screw your insurance rates.
One other thing I did not quite understand about PA ( a little off the subject) is when I went for a new policy they said my accident, although not my fault, did count against me in a way. They said I would score a little worse than someone who was not involved in any accident at all. I felt this was unfair but I still got a better policy for cheaper so I am not going to complain.
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 07:48 pm Post Subject:
I confirmed it to be true here in SC as well (spoke with a state trooper). In a chain reaction accident, it is their (uninformed) opinion that if there was a significant distance between the vehicles then there would not have been a chain reaction!
He told me of an accident in which a car was stopped waiting to turn left at an intersection, was rear-ended, and already having his wheels turned was pushed into the side of another car. The driver was found responsible for the car he hit because his wheels were turned!
He did say that if there is indication of excessive speed, or lack of braking...then the rear most car can be found at fault.
It really is incredibly hard to prove whether car 2 hit car 1 before or after being hit by car 3!
I wonder if any of these situations can be challenged successfully in court. It really sounds as if a lot of it is at the discretion of the state trooper or investigating officer!
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 08:44 pm Post Subject:
It really is incredibly hard to prove whether car 2 hit car 1 before or after being hit by car 3!
That's why one of your first questions when taking a recorded statement is, 'how many impacts did you feel?"Well, in the great state of MO, ''it just don't work that way'' :wink: There isn't a month that goes by I don't have a chain reactions accident...Generally everyone stopped at stop sign, light whatever, and idiot hit's the one furthest back then bang bang bang, longest one I ever had was five cars, (in a chain reaction, had more in a 'pile up')...It would be interesting to see how the carriers handle this, in arb...or if they even bother...tell you what if I was the middle of the oreo cookie, and got it on both ends...we'd be trying that law... :wink:
Add your comment