And then this happened
There's also something to be said that looking at the older versions, you knew it was an Infiniti. Well... that's because you have a posteriori knowledge/experience based on what, thirteen years of hindsight? It's a brand new design and several years from now, people will identify it with the Infiniti they have come to know, too.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 1
I have no idea how that got posted over on this thread - I was on and replying to the Q60 Final Teaser - Revealed in Detroit thread and how there were complaints about the Q60 not looking like an Infiniti (as if in 2003 the G35 screamed "Infiniti!"). And then this happened, lol. Bizarre.
Seems fairly cut and dry to me.
For example what if instead, an animal ran into the intersection.
The driver in front would still have had to stop, and the follower would have to as well.
There are very few circumstances I can think of when hitting the rear of another car is not the following car's fault.
All operators are obligated to maintain a safe stopping distance between themselves and the vehicle in front of them. They are also obligated to maintain enough awareness to observe a situation and have the ability to react.
Mostly because it is unreasonably difficult to be responsible for yourself as well as the car behind you.
For example what if instead, an animal ran into the intersection.
The driver in front would still have had to stop, and the follower would have to as well.
There are very few circumstances I can think of when hitting the rear of another car is not the following car's fault.
All operators are obligated to maintain a safe stopping distance between themselves and the vehicle in front of them. They are also obligated to maintain enough awareness to observe a situation and have the ability to react.
Mostly because it is unreasonably difficult to be responsible for yourself as well as the car behind you.
I agree the OP is at most fault, but no, I doubt it'll be 100% his, they will likely split 80/20-70/30 something like that. The car that rolled out was hardly over the cross walk so there was no need to completely stop but maybe slow/yield, who knows. Claims will take numerous things into consideration like following distance, how far into the intersection each car is and how much time they should have had to react to each other, weather, visibility, were headlights in your eyes, other risks the driver may have been looking at like other oncoming traffic or the sound of emergency vehicles in the distance, what all the witnesses say, the police report etc.. I'd like to see how this turns out OP. For the record, I'm an insurance agent so I see a lot of this stuff, that by no means says I know how the outcome will be though.
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 6,103
Likes: 592
From: People's Republic of IL
^^It's a judgement call. If an object enters your path of travel unexpectedly, first instinct is to slow down/stop. Given the limited distance, I think stopping was the best choice too. The driver of the other vehicle is already demonstrating incompetence by going on a red. It's not a far leap to assume they may go through the entire intersection on a red too.
There is a brief amount of time when that vehicle is not visible from the camera view so one can't really argue just how far past the line the car went. Still, it does appears the entire car is past the cross walk.
My behavior is very different following a car, suv/pickup, box truck, bus, semi with tractor. Each is an increasing larger obstruction requiring additional amounts of caution to be used.
There is a brief amount of time when that vehicle is not visible from the camera view so one can't really argue just how far past the line the car went. Still, it does appears the entire car is past the cross walk.
My behavior is very different following a car, suv/pickup, box truck, bus, semi with tractor. Each is an increasing larger obstruction requiring additional amounts of caution to be used.
If you collide with another car from behind, then you were following to closely to stop your vehicle in a controlled manner without causing a collision and are at fault. The only exception would be a situation in which another vehicle abruptly swerved close in front of you from anther travel lane and abruptly stopped in front of you. I have investigated crashes as a part of my job for about 20 years.
Registered Member
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 996
Likes: 201
From: SWPA
I agree the OP is at most fault, but no, I doubt it'll be 100% his, they will likely split 80/20-70/30 something like that. The car that rolled out was hardly over the cross walk so there was no need to completely stop but maybe slow/yield, who knows. Claims will take numerous things into consideration like following distance, how far into the intersection each car is and how much time they should have had to react to each other, weather, visibility, were headlights in your eyes, other risks the driver may have been looking at like other oncoming traffic or the sound of emergency vehicles in the distance, what all the witnesses say, the police report etc.. I'd like to see how this turns out OP. For the record, I'm an insurance agent so I see a lot of this stuff, that by no means says I know how the outcome will be though.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post