Mom just got into an accident

[PandaBear]

She was changing lane in a city street and the car right behind her didn't have the head light on (it was raining in bad weather). So the cars were having a side to side collision.

Mom's car have a dented passenger front door, and the other car claims to have lost a mirror, a dented door (the driver claims that it can't be opened), and some probably fender/bumper damages.

Right now the other car's driver claims to have some back pain, is it possible since that car is actually coming from behind and had a front/side collision, and both cars are going in the same direction.

My gut feeling is that my mom is at fault, what does it look like to all of you? We'll let the insurance company deal with it.

 

[Johnny]

Hope you Mom is okay. The car can be fixed.

 

[beast3300]

Originally Posted By: Johnny
Hope you Mom is okay. The car can be fixed.


X2

 

[BeanCounter]

Oftentimes, if it is hard to determine, they won't claim either at fault.

With inoperative *required* equipment, if it can be proven more or less, it does not fare well for the other individual. However, it also depends how they can pen negligence on your mom.

My brother, who is a police officer, briefly heard the situation and said he thinks it would be a toss-up. The person merging has to yield right-of-way, but if they can't see the other vehicle that is an issue. I'd put my money on neither person's fault, especially considering both vehicles have side damage, but don't count on me.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Johnny
Hope you Mom is okay. The car can be fixed.


Yeah, she is fine, and as much as I wanted to defend her, I think she is at fault here.

The other driver is fine too I think. My only concern is that she "claims" a back pain which I don't think is possible if it is a minor collision side to side, and am concerned that she is trying to get lawsuit and stuff going.

 

[opus1]

I'm thinking best case, both parties will be considered partially at fault.

My gut is telling me that the blame will go to Mom, though. But as long as everyone involved is OK, that's what counts.

 

[crazyoildude]

yeah back pain cha ching!
Here in NJ if you are caught filing a fake injury they procecute you...
Hope mom is ok..

 

[hemitom]

If it was dusk , driver is liable, must have lights on as a visual aid to other traffic, cars, bicycles people walking etc. If its daylight hours mom might in trouble.

 

[The_Jeff]

If the driver in the right lane was overtaking it could be their fault for passing on the right. Probably best thing to do is stay quiet until the police report comes out. You may have to pay a few dollars for a copy. Worth it: If in a year your insurance tries to go up and they say you're at fault, you have the police report to verify you really were.

Sounds like a classic "blind spot" scenario... where the other driver shouldn't have been, but your mom should have seen with an over-the-shoulder check.

 

[Scienceman]

+1

 

[tomcat27]

agree - hard to have back pain with a side to side collision. sounds like a setup for lawsuit. NP. let insurance handle it. the last time I got rear-ended I got three offers from different lawyers to "take my case". yeah, right. crooks.

 

[UNC017]

If you can PROVE the other driver had no lights on in conditions that should have required them, then you stand a decent chance of putting fault on them. But my guess is that since the other car was occupying the lane and your mom was in the act of changing lanes, the insurance company will probably say the other car had control of the lane.

But as others have said, I'd let it work out and see what happens before fighting anything.

 

[daves87rs]

JUst glad to hear that she is okay.

 

[greenaccord02]

I wouldn't worry too much. Insurance won't change too much if she had an otherwise clean record. Let the insurance lawyers sort it out and don't worry about it. Glad to hear she's OK.

 

[Herz]

Hope she is fine, the car can be fixed.

 

[ediamiam]

i believe california law requires headlights to be on when operating wipers. if other driver didn't have lights on i suspect some of the fault would be on them

 

[rjundi]

Always let the insurance company deal with it. Glad your mum is fine.

I actually had somebody hit my rear bumper recently wanting to avoid using insurance and police report. He said get some estimates including some shop.

I said fine lets go over to the bank across the street and you pay pull $1500 cash out of your account and I will pay you back the difference after fixed. He got upset and said did not have money.....I called police.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Our state has a law that headlights must be on when windshield wipers are on, ie. raining. Headlights on at dusk/dawn would be a halfhour after sunset to halfhour before sunrise. I would put most of it on the other guy for not having lights on. You need a hard, no-nonsense insurance company make that other guy toe the line.

Hope your Mom doesn't get freaked out and remains ok.

 

[addyguy]

In bad weather/visibility, the other car didn't have it's lights on, it's PandaBears mom's fault???

For heck's sake, PB, stand up for your mom!

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: addyguy
For heck's sake, PB, stand up for your mom!


Yeah, that's what I'm doing right now, and let the insurance deal with it. The other party seems to be a bit weird as well, mom and her both forgot to copy down most of the information and good thing the other car's driver wasn't giving a fake insurance info, or else my mom would end up in a "hit and run" case.

Funny how her insurance first claim to be Farmer's, but end up being AAA just like us. So it is within the same insurance company to deal with it. I don't think the other driver is 100% innocent either, in addition to not having headlight on, mom think she is speeding or trying to pass from the right (which is common in California).

Will keep you guys informed of the situation.