I guess it was my turn... My poor car :(

These past few weeks seemed to be jinxed for a lot of people on here, I guess I'm not immune.

My poor car...
and A couple more...

Sad

Ugh, sorry man. Doesn't look THAT bad though eh? Do you think it will be totaled?

Yeah. That circular puncture on the passenger's side is his from his tail pipe. He had almost no damage to his car at all. The bastard. He had no drivers license, no insurance, didn't speak English and he was driving his brother's car.

He STOPPED in the middle of the intersection at a yellow light. Arghh...

Send it to Loren. He'll get it stolen and you can get more insurance money that way!

And of course a new car.

And, let me guess, you were gunning it to squeak in under the red light?

I don't see anyone (in authority) being the least bit conciliatory. Too bad.

Actually, no. We were both doing about 15mph when we hit. I was slowing down, and he was speeding up like he was going to contiune through. Then he decided to slam on his breaks at the last second. Anyway, the CHP Officer put "no fault" on the report. My insurance is covering my damage.

By default it is supposed to be the person who hit the other from behind's fault, but because of all the other circumstances, and the fact that I had a witness, the Officer understood that it was mainly his fault, and partially my fault for not knowing what he was going to do. Apparently I'm supposed to be able to read minds.

No, you're supposed to be far enough back that braking in time will allow you to stop in time.

I have to agree with Bitt on this one. Theres never an excuse for running into the back of somebody. Your lucky your not getting sued by the guy with no licence and insurance! Theres still time for that though!

True. Nothing I can do now, my insurance will probably list me at fault.

Guess it wasn't that bad, really. I was still able to drive it home from San Ramon / Hayward where the accident happened (intersection of Crow Canyon Rd. & Bollinger Canyon Rd). No fluids leaking or anything scraping, so I figured it was ok to drive home. Didn't drive it to work this morning though.

Well, I just got a call from the insurance company. They are listing me at fault, which I figured would happen anyway. I found out that they towed his car and gave him three tickets (one for driving without a license, one for driving without insurance, and one for an "inappropriate abrupt stop"). I feel kind of bad that all that happened to him, but then again, he shouldn't have been driving without a license and/or insurance. <shrug>

Legally, I would think it would be your fault, but practically and logically it is his fault for not knowing how to drive.

The damage doesn't look too bad though. You may want to make sure your radiator wasn't damaged and has water in it.

That's pretty much how I look at it. The others are right as well though, had I been two or three car lengths further back (I was about three back when I first noticed break lights, so six), I might not have hit him at all. Although I can't judge how far my car would have slid in the conditions. When it comes down to it, it settles as partially my fault, no matter what.

Anyway, things happen. I'm OK, my friend (Soulseeker on here) is OK, and the car is going to the shop tomorrow. $500 out of my pocket, which is far better than the total bill, I'm sure.

I'm OK, my friend (Soulseeker on here) is OK,

That is, by far, the important thing.

I wasn't trying to admonish above. In fact, few of us probably leave enough room in most situations to satisfy the rules. They're all based on the idea that someone in front of you might have to slam on brakes for a legitimate reason so you shouldn't be following so closely. But it seems to me that if the person slams on brakes for no good reason, then it should be his fault, but then cops would have to think and defend their conclusions, which isn't likely to happen.

Ah, well, as I say, it's best that no one was hurt.

That is, by far, the important thing.

Most definitely.

...but then cops would have to think and defend their conclusions, which isn't likely to happen.

Right. Even my father mentioned that they default the blame to the person behind because it is that person's fault 99% of the time, and it is easier than trying to argue and find facts to prove the innocence of the 1% that aren't at fault. So, that 1% gets blamed anyway. And, of course, that 1% is a very grey area, so it seems to make sense that they would operate this way. I'm very sure those statistics are better than those of other laws.