Latest update December 29th, 2019 6:00 AM
Whose fault is it when a rear-end collision occurs?
The traffic law is complex, extensive and allows many specific and special cases. Simple wisdom, such as “whoever ascends, is always to blame,” can serve as a rough guide at best – but never as a universal solution.
In fact, in a rear-end collision, the debt is by no means always distributed according to this sentence. The frontman can be just as responsible for the collision as the entry end.
This article illuminates the question of guilt in a rear-end collision extensively. Various scenarios leading to this type of accident and their claims settlement are presented. In addition, you will find some judgments on the subject for guidance.
The phrase “whoever ascends, is guilty” is based on the so-called prima facie evidence: an argument based on empirical values.
The prima facie evidence of the rear-end collision is based on this principle: if there was a collision, the collision driver appeared to have committed a breach of duty. But quite simply, the question of guilt is not clarified in a rear-end collision.
Despite the prima facie evidence, the police can’t assign a guilty lump sum in a rear-end collision: they must carefully evaluate the location of the accident and record any testimony.
Rear-end Collision: Who is to Lame? Not always the Driveway!
If the driveway has not kept enough distance to the vehicle in front or drove too fast, the question of guilt is usually simply clarified: These are the classic cases, the guilt lies with the driver.
But what if the forerunner suddenly and unexpectedly brakes? At this point, it depends on whether there is a reason for this.
For example, if a child or a large animal crosses the street, the braking is justified, and the blame for the accident lies with the driver. The front driver prevented by the braking maneuver namely a greater evil.
Hit on a Stationary Car: What about the Question of Guilt?
Does someone collide with a standing car and cause a rear-end collision, is it surely his fault? After all, the vehicle of the accident opponent did not even move. But even in this situation, the rule “Whoever comes up, has guilt” doesn’t always apply.
For example, if the car has been parked on the street without adequate lighting or security, the owner of the vehicle may also be partially liable.
It Becomes Clear: The Question “Who has to blame for a rear-end collision” can’t be answered on a flat-rate basis. Since this form of accident is particularly popular with insurance fraudsters, which provoke the collision on purpose, the involvement of a lawyer in many cases.
