Accident poll

meckman · 11-20-2004, 04:04 PM

Please take a look at page 1 and 2 of an accident report and cast your vote for who was a fault for this accident. Pages 3 and 4 only have demographic information about the drivers and are not relevant. I have marked out names, addresses, and phone #'s to protect the innocent. I'm trying to be un-bias as possible so I will not add any thing else to this thread until I feel there have been a big enough sampling of the group.

37L1 · 11-20-2004, 05:02 PM

Looks to me that V-1 was at fault for not having headlights on during darkness, and that an independent witness corroborated that V-1's headlights were not on.

Am I missing something here?

meckman · 11-20-2004, 05:07 PM

You are correct in your assumption. Again, I don't want to sway the results of this poll by adding anymore information other than what's in the accident report.

KWYJIBO · 11-20-2004, 06:23 PM

Its a 4 way stop, looks like vehicle #2 did not yield the right away, vehicle #1 had already stopped and then continued on.

Did this happen to you

meckman · 11-20-2004, 06:44 PM

The picture drawn by the police officer is a little misleading. This is not at an intersection. The entrance to Wal-Mart is about 50-60 feet north (up). The entrance is rather across from the car wash. Yes, this did happen to me. Just want some un-bias opinions. I'll reveal my motives to this post after more people weigh in on this issue.

KWYJIBO · 11-20-2004, 06:56 PM

sorry this happend to you, I have been in this situation before
the report says dark(lighted) the lights in the parking lot are bright and the other person should have seen you regardles if you had your headlights on or off

SUBTITAN · 11-20-2004, 07:05 PM

My law would have V-1 at fault do to not turning on her lights, and by the first page of the ticket it says it is, but looking at the second page leads me to believe V-2 is at fault for not yielding the right of way.

*Squid* · 11-20-2004, 07:17 PM

I voted neither.
I'm not a lawyer but I give V1 a ticket for no headlights, and I give V2 a ticket for failure to yield right of way, and let the Insurance lawyers fight it out.

ensclark · 11-20-2004, 08:13 PM

A rule of thumb, as any officer writes a traffic crash report they put V1 as the one who "caused" the crash. The only thing that I can see that put it this way was the W1. With out the witness it would be the other way around and V1 would have been the one pulling out of the Danatos Pizza's parking lot. Where it says V2 pulled out and struck V1 is something to question and could be brought up in an argument and I think could have been put a different way but the facts are that V2 did pull out and "strike" V1 which was caused do to the fact that no lights were on causing driver of V2 not to see V1. A way to look at it is what could have been done to prevent the crash. It's easy to say that if V1 had his lights on then V2 would not have pulled out. A question would be if there was a ticket given to either driver.

Just my thoughts on it. I've had to write more than one of these.

meckman · 11-21-2004, 06:41 AM

No tickets were given to either driver.

meckman · 11-21-2004, 06:47 AM

I'd like to get about 20 people total to weigh in on this issue before I let you all know the circumstances.

m4ck · 11-21-2004, 07:33 AM

If it were me I would have given ticket to V1 for no lights in the dark. If its dark and cloudy how could anyone be accountable for hitting a vehicle that didn't bother to turn headlights on.
Just my .02
M4ck

GHog · 11-21-2004, 08:11 AM

I would have to go with veh 1 also due to the no headlights. However it could be a little tricky as veh 2 is at fault for not yielding right of way to number 1 even though number 1 had no headlights. I know the the light conditions say dark but also states it was at a lighted interesection. May depend on how dark it actually was........tuff call but I would fine veh 1 and sue the S*#% out of them for everything I could think of.........At least it seems that is what eveyone does these days isn't it :-)

GHog

dooboy2112 · 11-21-2004, 08:42 AM

The more I think about it V1 should be at fault for no lights. But V2 should have seen them if they where paying attention and not talking to the phone, eating in the car, or messing with the radio.

TriKKy · 11-21-2004, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GHog

I would have to go with veh 1 also due to the no headlights. However it could be a little tricky as veh 2 is at fault for not yielding right of way to number 1 even though number 1 had no headlights. I know the the light conditions say dark but also states it was at a lighted interesection. May depend on how dark it actually was........tuff call but I would fine veh 1 and sue the S*#% out of them for everything I could think of.........At least it seems that is what eveyone does these days isn't it :-)

GHog

I agree w/v1 @fault. If the intersection was lighted, it would make it even harder for v2 to see v1 coming if v1 was in the dark. Same thing when you try to look outside your house at night...you cant do it with the lights on so you either shut them off or put your face up to the window and block all ambient light from getting to your eyes with your hands.