Talk about a close call!!!

[GeorgeK]

Looong before throwing the blame on the Nissan, there is a simple fact one can not oversee:

The pickup driver, as every driver, has a duty to look where he is going. and to stop for obstacles.

All the rest is moot. There is no need to analyse why the Nissan stopped. There is an obstacle on the road, NOT a sudden unforeseeable trap. Had the pickup driver been driving instead of doing whatever else, this would not have happened. Fault is his. If it had been a dead cow, or any natural obstacle on the road, he'd have creamed it as well.

[Z-man]

Right or wrong, the Nissan driver was still stupid for stopping.

Funny thing happened to me on the way to work....

Driving on the Garden State Parkway - 65mph zone. All of a sudden, there's a huge slowdown infront of me. Turns out about 10 cars ahead of me, there's a BMW 5-series STOPPED in the fast last lane - maybe 5 inches over the line -- with most of the car still occupying the fast lane. Driver had his flashers on and was on the cell phone.

I presume these was some mechanical issue, but the driver could have made a better effort at pulling over. Could have gotten really bad really fast.

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

Looong before throwing the blame on the Nissan, there is a simple fact one can not oversee:

The pickup driver, as every driver, has a duty to look where he is going. and to stop for obstacles.

All the rest is moot. There is no need to analyse why the Nissan stopped. There is an obstacle on the road, NOT a sudden unforeseeable trap. Had the pickup driver been driving instead of doing whatever else, this would not have happened. Fault is his. If it had been a dead cow, or any natural obstacle on the road, he'd have creamed it as well.

While according to the letter of the law, you are correct - the driver behind is always at fault.

That does not negatve the fact that the Nissan driver was stupid for stopping in the middle of the road. You don't do that - people don't expect that - it is a dangerous thing to do. Just like that BMW driver on my way to work.

So - if you are going to come to a dead stop in the middle of the road for no apparent reason, don't be surprised if you get slammed in the rear by another car.

-Z-man.

[GeorgeK]

Zoltan,
This is where you are wrong.
People MUST expect obstacles on the road. That is why attention to the road is mandatory. At all times.
Stopping might be stupid, however the fault is stil with the driver that did not perform the first duty, look at the road, and that stops from further znalysis, before even considering the circumstances, which in this case also favor the Nissan, i.e. gradual slowing to a stop on a good visibility road. Damn the reason.
What if there was someone on the road that caused the stop?

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by Z-man

Right or wrong, the Nissan driver was still stupid for stopping.

Funny thing happened to me on the way to work....

Driving on the Garden State Parkway - 65mph zone. All of a sudden, there's a huge slowdown infront of me. Turns out about 10 cars ahead of me, there's a BMW 5-series STOPPED in the fast last lane - maybe 5 inches over the line -- with most of the car still occupying the fast lane. Driver had his flashers on and was on the cell phone.

I presume these was some mechanical issue, but the driver could have made a better effort at pulling over. Could have gotten really bad really fast.


While according to the letter of the law, you are correct - the driver behind is always at fault.

That does not negatve the fact that the Nissan driver was stupid for stopping in the middle of the road. You don't do that - people don't expect that - it is a dangerous thing to do. Just like that BMW driver on my way to work.

So - if you are going to come to a dead stop in the middle of the road for no apparent reason, don't be surprised if you get slammed in the rear by another car.

-Z-man.

My concern, is if I do have a GOOD reason for stopping - the truck driver would creme me good reason or not.

This is why on back country roads where a deer can run out in front, I slow up or stop to let the stupid driver behind me pass. These guys are only looking at my back bumper, if that, and if something happens, they won't see it until they slam into me! I've lost one 944, I'm not losing another...

If I'd of been behind the Nissan, I'd of understood that after nearly getting in a head on collision, combined with other stopped vehichles, that they might need a "breather" to make sure it was safe to pass the cyclists. Its best to ere on the side of caution with cyclists. I don't like pulling out in front of one head light at night...even if I think I've got it.

If you notice, the lady did take her foot off the brake, and was about to drive forwards past the cyclists, but when the truck screeched, she put her foot back on the brake again. Probably saved her some neck injury.

As for the BMW, if you expect everyone to barrel past a problem, and keep moving, how is he supposed to move over to the right? If he lost power, he's slowing down, and if the other cars don't slow down to let him past, he's left lane stuck...

[techweenie]

Okay, very persuasive arguments here. I am now reducing my blame assessment on the Nissan driver from 50% to 49%.

[Z-man]

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

Zoltan,
This is where you are wrong.
People MUST expect obstacles on the road. That is why attention to the road is mandatory. At all times.
Stopping might be stupid, however the fault is stil with the driver that did not perform the first duty, look at the road, and that stops from further znalysis, before even considering the circumstances, which in this case also favor the Nissan, i.e. gradual slowing to a stop on a good visibility road. Damn the reason.
What if there was someone on the road that caused the stop?

Like I said in my post above -- the truck driver (driver 'behind') was at fault. But that doesn't negate the fact that the Nissan driver did not use common sense in that scenario.

Three common sense things that were missing with the Nissan driver:
1. If you do something unexpected - like coming to a short stop when it typically doesn't happen - then at least check your rear view mirror to see what's behind you.
2. If you are coming to an unexpected stop, do everything you can to get yourself noticed by the person behind you -- ex: at least hit the flashers or blare your horn.
3. If you must stop, do your best to pull over and out of the way of the normal flow of traffic. If you can't, then at least do #2.

Blame who you will -- the Nissan driver now has to deal with getting his car repaired or replaced. If he would have kept on going, (if it was truly safe to do so), then most likely he would not have had the forthcoming troubles to deal with.

-Z-man.

[VINMAN]

Originally Posted by Z-man

Right or wrong, the Nissan driver was still stupid for stopping.

Funny thing happened to me on the way to work....

Driving on the Garden State Parkway - 65mph zone. All of a sudden, there's a huge slowdown infront of me. Turns out about 10 cars ahead of me, there's a BMW 5-series STOPPED in the fast last lane - maybe 5 inches over the line -- with most of the car still occupying the fast lane. Driver had his flashers on and was on the cell phone.
-Z-man.

A slowdown on the parkway? never happen....

Nissan driver 10% wrong. P/U driver 90% . He obviously wasnt paying attention.

[gacook]

Originally Posted by Z-man

Right or wrong, the Nissan driver was still stupid for stopping.

Funny thing happened to me on the way to work....

Driving on the Garden State Parkway - 65mph zone. All of a sudden, there's a huge slowdown infront of me. Turns out about 10 cars ahead of me, there's a BMW 5-series STOPPED in the fast last lane - maybe 5 inches over the line -- with most of the car still occupying the fast lane. Driver had his flashers on and was on the cell phone.

I presume these was some mechanical issue, but the driver could have made a better effort at pulling over. Could have gotten really bad really fast.


While according to the letter of the law, you are correct - the driver behind is always at fault.

That does not negatve the fact that the Nissan driver was stupid for stopping in the middle of the road. You don't do that - people don't expect that - it is a dangerous thing to do. Just like that BMW driver on my way to work.

So - if you are going to come to a dead stop in the middle of the road for no apparent reason, don't be surprised if you get slammed in the rear by another car.

-Z-man.

Not ALWAYS. Back in the early-mid 90s, it was a common scam here (Arizona) for people to get ahead of you and around a bend in the road, or over a hill, they slam on their brakes. Soon as you crest the hill, or take the turn, BAM. You rearend them, they collect insurance money. Happened to my brother, and when the insurance company looked into it, they found the people my brother hit had been hit by something like 10 other people in the recent past, called it fraud and the cops ended up prosecuting them.

[Zeke]

That is for sure "Suck Creek."

[Rick Lee]

Some states have a "contributory negligence" law, where, if you're found to be at least 1% responsible for an accident, your own insurance is on the hook for your damages. Obviously, in this video, the stopped car would be at least that much at fault.

I have super bright LEDs on my bike that flash for a few seconds and then go solid when I hit the brake lever or pedal. Even once I'm stopped somewhere, if I see a car coming up behind me, I hit the brakes again to wake him up.

[MRM]

More than one person in an accident can have "fault". Usually everyone involved in an accident gets assigned some degree of negligence or fault, even if it is a small percentage. Here, I think the motorcyclist were wrong to stop in such busy traffic at such an awkward spot with a narrow shoulder. The car was wrong for being so deferential and stopping, even though the cyclists were off the road (barely) and his lane was clear. And of course, the greatest amount of fault goes to the truck who just didn't see a car stopped in the roadway in front of him. Drivers are required to see obstructions on the road ahead of them, but it is unwise to put that requirement to the test.