Today I narrowly missed a car (Ford escape) that broke down in the middle of a road where most cars drive at a very high rate of speed. It came at a surprise because it’s right at this blind spot S like road, not like u can see it from 0.5 miles away.
There were no hazard light or brake lights activated. I’m guessing the ford just got stranded there.
Had I hit the car, whose fault will this be?
I was very lucky to be driving 35mph when most cars were flying by and dodge it just in time.
Thanks!
Who is at fault if a car stops completely/broke down in a middle of the road (curve road where most drive >55mph) without emergency hazard light on?
byu/seattleseahawks111 inInsurance
Posted by seattleseahawks111
14 Comments
The stalled car could possibly have some fault assigned, but any car that hits them will be at the very least the majority at fault ahs possibly 100%. The fact that someone is driving “at a very high rate of speed” obviously isn’t going to be helpful in avoiding liability.
Rear ender… cause you’re supposed to be watching the road and not following close.
If you can’t see around a corner it’s negligent not to slow down such that you can safely stop within the appropriate amount of time…
A parked and unoccupied vehicle is almost never at fault. Breakdowns happen. You have a duty to watch for road hazards.
You would be if you hit the other car. You should slow down for curves so that’s not really an excuse.
It’s the driver’s job to drive such that they can avoid road hazards. Whatever caused the car to break down could quite easily cause the hazard lights not to work, for example if it’s an electrical problem or if the driver has had a medical emergency. If the driver has had a medical emergency and can’t activate the hazard lights not only will the hazard lights not be on but anybody hitting that car will probably be dealing with a heck of an injury liability as well!
You would’ve been at fault.
It would be your fault for hitting the car.
Almost without exception, it would be your fault if you struck a disabled car in the middle of the road. You should drive slowly enough that you can come to a complete stop if you encounter an obstacle in the road. If there’s a blind turn in the road, you should slow down enough that you can come around that turn and stop completely if you need to.
The moving car hit a stopped vehicle. The moving car is at fault.
Well, there are couple of things to consider.
First, it is the primary duty for the operator of any motor vehicle to do their best to avoid crashing their vehicle into anything else. Of course, this is not always possible. But when it is possible, and within reason, then the driver who fails to avoid crashing their car into something is going to have some responsibility. Maybe not all, maybe not most, but some. This is, of course, common sense. So that is why most replies here are going to say “if you hit a stationary object, that’s your fault.”
Now, that said, it is **ALSO** against the rules pretty much in every jurisdiction to abandon your vehicle on the roadway. And many jurisdictions require road cones, flares, flags, etc. something to help advise other drivers that your vehicle is disabled and is now some sort of road hazard. There are often time limits, but maybe ‘soft’ ones like the driver must make “reasonable attempt” to indicate the hazard properly which means it up to a judge to decide later if what they did was “reasonable” or not. A lot of things in the world of auto liability have ‘soft’ regulations like that. The word “reasonable” is used quite commonly, but it is never, ever defined.
OK, so if my car breaks down and I walk to the local gas station, buy a few road cones, then walk back to the car, and it’s 3 hours later, and I find out that someone hit my car, did I take “reasonable” steps to mitigate the loss? It may be up to everyone involved to argue it out in front of a judge.
Let’s consider a case of fraud, too- what if I am tired of paying for my car, and I know that setting it on fire is too obviously fraud, so I drive it to a blind turn on the highway at night, turn off the lights, and I leave it there for a few hours, hoping that someone crashes into it and totals it. Risky move, but as you can see from the replies on here, lots of people, presumably insurance adjusters, wouldn’t even bother asking any question about it. They would just cut the check, presuming that their own driver is 100% at fault for some reason.
You can separate drivers approaching a broken down vehicle into two categories:
1. Drivers paying attention, looking *UP* (not down at the pavement in front of their wheels), traveling a reasonable speed given conditions, and that avoid the broken down vehicle safely.
2. Everyone else.
See this [insane video here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9yqXzZ16ns). Some people have absolutely no problem, and then there’s everyone else.
If you hit a stationary car in the road way right off the bat as an adjuster I’d accept.
There’s little reason to be going that fast especially on a curved road where you can only see 0.5 miles ahead of you
If you hit a stationary object you are going to be at fault or mostly at fault 99% of the time.