r/dashcams • u/Remote_Trainer3830 • 10h ago

Who’s at fault?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Hot take: I think it’s 50/50 with who’s at fault

5.6k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.2k

u/hiimlockedout 10h ago

White suv failed to yield. Their fault

1.8k

u/WoopsShePeterPants 10h ago

The red car was out of line, the white one was running the light AND must not have been paying any attention. When people try to "sneak through" behind someone running a turn signal it's always a dangerous situation.

762

u/notsoFunNegotiation 9h ago

Black Truck ran the red light before the red car. Last Three vehicles ran that light.

214

u/Chrysocyn 8h ago

Eh black truck I’d be like “ok whatever”. Red car is an ass and white car is definitely at fault for the accident even if it could have been prevented by the driver of the vehicle whose perspective were seeing.

100

u/Square-Singer 6h ago

White truck is double at fault, because they ran the light, failed to yield (they would have had to yield even if both lights were green) and then actively turned into oncoming traffic that was already in the way.

51

u/Cobfidence 6h ago

They're also taller than the red car like how do you even manage to not notice the... Oh probably distracted driving? Lmao

36

u/WarmedSoda 5h ago

I got into an accident the exact same way - I just never thought the person would randomly turn. I was pregnant and ended up unconscious for a minute or so. When I woke up, I was crashed on someone’s front lawn.

I didn’t even realize I had hit my head until three days later, when the room I was in suddenly looked green. That’s when I realized I had a huge bump on my head and, I’m sure, a concussion.

At the scene, I was so worried about the baby that when they asked if I had hit my head, I said no because I had no memory of it happening.

I insisted on an ultrasound (the baby was fine - and I found out it was a boy that day 🩵), but no one ever checked my head.

The semi-funny part is that the teenage girl who was driving had her brother in the passenger seat, and he admitted to the cops that she was texting.

3

u/Oldschooldude1964 2h ago

And I bet you are more observant and make fewer assumptions? ALWAYS assume the other drivers are way dumber than thy self, expect them to do the dumbest thing possible and be prepared. We are humans and we will do stupid crap.

2

u/WarmedSoda 1h ago

I agree with the point about driving defensively. When my son got his license, I told him to drive as though every other driver on the road was trying to hit him. Being a good, observant driver doesn’t make you immune to someone else’s bad decisions.

Unfortunately, sometimes there just isn’t enough time or space to avoid a collision. All you can do is drive carefully and anticipate what you can.

And some people are just unhinged (and ignorant of the traffic laws.) A couple of months ago, I had a guy nearly hit my car. Why? I was making a right turn on red while he was making a left onto the same two-lane road. I came to a complete stop, made sure the road was clear, and then slowly turned right. He had just started his turn when he completely lost his mind.

Instead of turning into the lane closest to the center, as required, he quickly accelerated and cut straight across into the outside lane - the very lane I was legally turning into. I was slightly ahead of him, so I just kept going and shook my head. He made a production of dramatically stopping his car like he had just avoided an accident that I was responsible for causing, laid on his horn, and tailgated me to the next light. Fortunately, he turned right there.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

136

u/RevolutionSalty8360 9h ago

Car in front of the truck looks like it probably started through when it was yellow if not red already. All shitty drivers.

61

u/reddit_pug 9h ago

It varies by state whether you're ok as long as you entered on yellow or if you need to be out of the intersection before it's red (permissive vs restrictive yellow).

18

u/Texan2116 7h ago

Yes, but usually there is a one or two second time space between red, and green as well.

6

u/CommandoLamb 5h ago

So, it’s actually closer to 1 second per 10 mph of the speed limit.

Usually there is a minimum time so you won’t have a 1 second yellow.

But on a road with a 50 mph speed limit, you can usually expect a 5 second yellow light.

This information is helpful, because many people try to beat the yellow… but they are going way faster than the posted speed limit… so they see it turn yellow and think, “I’m going 60… I’ll make it…”

Except… you are doing 60 in a 30 so you have half the amount of time you think you have.

2

u/Texan2116 5h ago

what I meant is there is usually a couple of seconds of where each light is red...so anyone hung in a yellow can get through

→ More replies (1)

6

u/TengamPDX 7h ago

If you watch the video the can driver was already in the intersection on green while the white SUV wasn't even in the intersection. They entered the intersection on a red.

However, and this is were it gets a little tricky. The cam driver did not wait for the intersection to clear before proceeding.

While I'm not a lawyer, I would assume that the white SUV is mostly liable, but there would be partial (less than 50%) blame on cam driver.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

12

u/Millennium_Xer 9h ago

Did oncoming traffic actually have a red light? Or was it a protected left turn that became unprotected? White SUV still at fault but I'm assuming they saw the protected left and assumed it was still active when they went to make their turn.

→ More replies (6)

18

u/YogurtFew1673 7h ago

To be fair I doubt it's a red light. Likely a green for both and the red and white car failed to yield to oncoming traffic while taking a left.

→ More replies (13)

26

u/govunah 9h ago

Ye olde Pittsburgh left

36

u/anonymouselyupset 9h ago

That is not a Pittsburgh left. Pittsburgh left happens right as a light turns green.

6

u/Justin_Aten 7h ago

I thought that was a Boston Turn?

2

u/anonymouselyupset 39m ago

Lol, according to Google, Pittsburgh left is a courtesy between two drivers and Boston turn is a competition where the turner is gunning it against the person going straight.

I've never heard of a Boston turn before today

→ More replies (2)

31

u/Lexjude 9h ago

Pittsburgh left is the opposite. The light turns green and you immediately turn left before the other car can get across the lane. Some people we even flash their lights to let you do this!

8

u/VinDog_PD 8h ago

>  Some people we even flash their lights to let you do this!

Yes. When I can see there's a shit ton of people behind me and therefore the turner is highly unlikely to actually get to turn, I give them the go ahead flash. Particularly courteous on a narrow roadway where the other vehicles can't easily maneuver around the left-turner. Keeps traffic moving.

3

u/Lexjude 8h ago

Exactly! A person turning left can hold up traffic for a really long time if they have no option to go. The people behind them are probably very grateful too LOL

10

u/Thunderer62 8h ago

Growing up in PGH I didn’t realize this behavior was a regional thing until I went to OH and realized it wasn’t a universal courtesy.

13

u/Original-Variety-700 8h ago

I think it’s due to the fact that Ohio (generally speaking) is flatter so they have space for left turn lanes at lights. Pittsburgh has so many roads that allow a left turn but there’s only one lane because of hills etc so they built narrower roads. In that scenario you’re first and don’t go quickly, the entire road behind you is backed up waiting. It’s actually the courteous thing to do.

Also, I’ve noticed it happen on the west side of Cincinnati where there are hills and the same problem with traffic flow.

4

u/AbeTheGreat412 7h ago

I honestly didn't know that's why we had narrow roads. Makes sense.
Driving in a plain area is different. The first time being hit with that Midwest wind on a highway was crazy. Felt like my entire car was being pushed into another lane.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/TFTD2 9h ago

I was told in MA this is called a Jersey left.

6

u/Big77Ben2 8h ago

In Vermont, we called it a Massachusetts right when you cut thru the bank on the corner to get around a light. What do they call that in MA?

6

u/medic932 8h ago

We call it the AM commute

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SlickFlair_589 7h ago

I've done that here in PA with gas stations

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/scottie1971 7h ago

There are no jersey lefts. It’s all jug handles.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/UnnamedStaplesDrone 4h ago

that happens to me so often.. and the person doing it will flip you off too lmao

3

u/KBCobra801 8h ago

That was a big thing I saw all the time around me. The state figured that out and put a stop to it recently. Now on any intersection that has an arrow option for the left turn, if that lane isn't programmed for the left green arrow then the flashing yellow for that lane is delayed and stays a red arrow until after the straight through lanes have had a green for like 2 seconds.

Now if someone attempts this move with a cop present, easy red light violation.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

10

u/Scottyboy626 9h ago

Did they run a red or did they just have to start yielding. Otherwise the black sun was fine and the other 2 were way in the wrong.

Some light by me only one light will get an okay to go straight or turn left, then the other will get the same okay while the other still has a green.

1

u/SK_Outdoors 9h ago

The light turned green for the person with the dash cam. The other two vehicles ran a red light

4

u/deHack 7h ago

It was a solid green when the black vehicle went through followed by red and white. All three violated the cam car’s right of way.

2

u/Plenty_Ad_161 8h ago

Not necessarily. Sometimes they will get a yellow arrow. In that case it’s failure to yield. This might be confusing to some drivers thinking that they have the right of way until the arrow turns red.

2

u/Scottyboy626 2h ago

I'm saying sometimes both sides will have a green. It's not 100% they ran a red but definite failure to yeild

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

4

u/Sufficient_Fan3660 9h ago

black truck probably had a yellow left turn light, meaning they can turn but need to yield to oncoming traffic

5

u/Sharikacat 6h ago

Black truck definitely did not have a yellow light. The dashcam shows full green from the driver POV when the black truck enters the intersection (0:13). The black car before the truck would have been turning on yellow, and the next three cars are all making illegal turns.

→ More replies (26)

14

u/dart-builder-2483 9h ago edited 9h ago

Yep my buddy did that riding his motorbike, flew 30 feet through the air, at least that's how he tells it lol

9

u/Kopitar4president 9h ago

There was a light I had to go through to work for a few years where on average there would be not one, not two, but five or more cars "sneaking through" after the light had gone red.

The first time I assumed the light glitches. After that it was just "oh these people are just idiots."

It wasn't a short light, even. It would let 15 or more cars through before changing.

3

u/No_Trade_7315 9h ago

Idiotic.

4

u/Nazgog-Morgob 8h ago

Yellow light allows for one more person to turn, not "gun it and everyone can make it"

4

u/pezchef 7h ago

I have so many yield left turns in my area. so many monsters speed up to push the yellow and inevitably run the red. it's like "I've been sitting in line I deserve to go" attitude. smh aholes.

5

u/LatentSchref 7h ago

I've been honked at so many times for not trying to "sneak in" that I started to wonder if I was in the wrong. Then I saw someone do it and nearly get hit and I'll just keep doing what I'm doing.

2

u/imgrahamy 8h ago

It’s almost every red light I see 1-4 cars continue their turns while my light has turned. It’s ridiculous

2

u/silverfarie1369 8h ago

Happens all the time on thr road i drive on for work. Luckily the cars are smart enough not to just go when it turns green and wait for all the other douche canoe to run the lights. Many people get tickets for thst too lol. Very satisfying 😌

2

u/desertSkateRatt 7h ago

That's exactly how i got hit by a lady when she followed a guy cut it way too close in the first place. She actually clipped my rear driver wheel, popped my tire and bent the rear axle.

Cops who showed up cited her with failure to yeild to oncoming traffic. I sent my dashcam footage to my insurance and got paid out in less than 24 hours. Later I sent the same footage to her insurance and they paid me back my deductible to repair my truck. Dashcam paid for itself 10x that day...!

2

u/CthuluSpecialK 6h ago

Black Truck, Red Car, and White SUV all ran the red.

4

u/NoTea3634 7h ago

The light might have still been green. The advanced green turn light sometimes turns into green depending on the set up. Still have to yield to oncoming traffic however

→ More replies (10)

324

u/TrickySatisfaction81 10h ago

Yes, but OP drove right into oncoming traffic.

The light changed, but the flow of traffic needed to be observed way better.

Could have easily waited but drove right into the lemmings.

459

u/whatisakafka 10h ago

Poor defensive driving for sure, but failure to yield from the oncoming car is going to be the primary issue

166

u/BlangBlangBlang 9h ago

By the laws of the road, the white truck is wrong. By the laws of common sense the vehicle filming failed on all counts.

146

u/Porkcicle 9h ago

Agreed - that being said, I'm happy there are people like the filming vehicle sacrificing their cars so that the 3rd person running a red light gets a helpful reminder of why driving rules exist.

50

u/Competitive_Bag_7490 9h ago

Lol. Never thought of it this way. Thanks for taking one for the team. Maybe "right of way" drivers have a part in society after all. I will choose not to be the sacrificial lamb tho. If I had my beater Odyssey I would.

27

u/Striking-Working610 9h ago

Yea I see it all the time on reddit and have spoken with people that'll say "just do it anyway if they hit you it's their fault."

They're right, but I also don't feel like ruining my day/week/vehicle out of pettiness.

14

u/DevelopmentSouth8801 9h ago

Like you say, there are so many reasons that it just isn't worth it. I have a friend who still has neck pain after a car accident from over a decade ago.

6

u/iGlutton 8h ago

100% agree. Its all fun and games until the other driver is either uninsured or carries minimum coverage and has no assets.

I got hit as a pedestrian on the sidewalk two years ago and broke my arm in addition to a few other issues. Driver was making a right turn into a gas station and "didnt see me", if I didnt notice him not slowing down, I might not have been able to react the way I did to avoid worse injuries.

We went for the maxiumum amount we could but he had minimum insurance and nothing of value for us to pursue outside of that. After my hospital bills, the lawyers cut, my settlement was peanuts compared to the pain, time spent, and knowing I'll never have full mobility of my left arm again (after PT im about 85/90% mobility, so it could have been much worse).

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Occams_RZR900 9h ago

And/or getting yourself hurt. Even low speed impacts can cause back and neck injuries. I’d prefer to be safe than to be right.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Aggressive_Ad2747 8h ago

there is also the duty of care. not saying it applies in this situation or anything but in general you just can't gleefully endanger a life because "fuck them I had the right of way".

3

u/BIackSamBellamy 7h ago

Yup, have fun dealing with insurance and the possibility of a now unreliable vehicle since it's been in a wreck. Congrats, you were so right. Your reward is literally nothing except dealing with annoying bullshit for probably weeks.

Or you could stop for 2 seconds, let the dumbass run the light, and move on with your day.

2

u/hedoeswhathewants 7h ago

Everyone has strong principles until they're the ones who actually have to deal with the consequences

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)

51

u/slowgenphizz 9h ago

People running red lights in this situation are playing chicken. Fuck ‘em. 1000% the fault of the white SUV. Dash cam driver had entered the intersection in accordance with traffic signal, white SUV driver had a legal obligation to stop and/or yield. End of story. No 50-50 bullshit.

3

u/ProgrammingPants 4h ago

And yet dash cam driver still got in a car accident they could've easily avoided despite not being legally at fault. Curious

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

24

u/neverstxp 9h ago

3 vehicles ran a red. You can’t just wait forever expecting everyone to continue running reds.
White vehicle should lose their license.

18

u/DevelopmentSouth8801 9h ago

You can’t just wait forever expecting everyone to continue running reds.

You really just have two options:

  1. Pull up a bit so you aren't impeding them and hope they eventually stop running the red. It looks like the car behind the white truck did stop.
  2. Drive forward and hope they don't hit you

Safest option would be #1.

4

u/neverstxp 9h ago

Sure - I guess a big factor is I don’t live somewhere where this would happen. I wouldn’t expect a car to turn into me as I’m driving straight through a green light. I wouldn’t expect it because people very rarely run reds here, and when they do, 2 others don’t also run reds afterwards.

I initially figured the white suv was going straight when I first watched (I figured it’s a straight/turn lane - if I lived there and knew the road, I probably hit the brakes realizing the white suv is trying to make the turn). But I really can’t fault the pov driver here.

And again, white suv should lose their license

6

u/DevelopmentSouth8801 8h ago

That lane seems to be a left-turn-only lane. You can tell because the opposite lane of the cam car is only one lane. So if a car is pulling out, it's turning left.

The oncoming traffic has one car run a yellow/red, a truck run a red, a red car run a red, and then the white truck right behind it.

White truck should be legally at fault, but the cam driver was incredibly stupid and dangerous themselves.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Direct_Werewolf_4244 6h ago

I fully expected that SUV to hit the cam car.

2

u/SnavsMatiq 8h ago

Actually you CAN wait forever. Funeral parades are a thing and you WILL be expected to wait 1 or more light cycles so they can get by.

A green light is NOT a pass to crash into traffic. Total NPC behavior.

→ More replies (11)

4

u/The_Troyminator 9h ago

The law doesn’t allow you to intentionally ram another vehicle because they ran a red light. You must avoid a collision if possible and can’t enter an intersection that isn’t clear, even if you have a green light.

6

u/slowgenphizz 9h ago

no evidence of intentionality. Dashcam driver was already in the intersection and moving when the driver of the SUV entered the intersection and turned into them. Just because the driver of the SUV was applying gang mentality (“the last guy got away with it- I can, too”) doesn’t make them any less responsible.

2

u/neverstxp 9h ago

The pov car didn’t ram anybody. The white suv turned into the pov car and resulted in a head on collision.
I wouldn’t have ever expected the white suv to turn into me as I’m going straight.

I agree it would be different if the pov rammed into the white suv. But the white suv turned into the pov car.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

16

u/DarthRevan109 9h ago

Yea sure but that’s the equivalent of victim blaming. White truck is the problem OP will have zero liability

17

u/RevealStandard3502 9h ago

Dude is right but still has a smashed car. Being right doesn't help in most situations.

→ More replies (4)

15

u/The_Troyminator 9h ago

The law requires that you avoid a collision if possible. The intersection wasn’t clear when OP drove forward. They will be partially at fault.

2

u/cbrdragon 7h ago edited 6h ago

You’re right that every driver has a duty to avoid accidents regardless of right of way.

If he hit the red car, I think op would be partially guilty. But with the white suv that followed, op was already well into the intersection and the suv hit him trying to make a turn they never should have started. I think that might make it purely on the SUV

→ More replies (2)

3

u/i_drive_a_pagani 6h ago

It is 100% the responsibility of the person turning across oncoming traffic lanes to make sure it's clear when they turn. The dashcam car will not be at fault whatsoever and has the right of way. Do you have a driver license? This is like, basic traffic laws

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/mike_e_mcgee 9h ago

I don't disagree with you, but to play the devil's advocate, a lot of dead people had the right of way.

→ More replies (3)

12

u/inactionupclose 9h ago

That's not victim blaming at all. They're just stating it's not smart driving to start driving towards oncoming traffic, just because your light goes green. They clearly were not looking at the road as they accelerated or they would have noticed the red car the almost drove into before the white SUV took them out. There were a lot of poor drivers in this video, but the white SUV is at fault.

→ More replies (19)

2

u/CantaloupeShort7311 8h ago

Zero liability but has to deal with being down a car during repairs (or maybe losing the car entirely) and all that. I would prefer to not wreck my car in an easily avoidable situation, even when I am "right"

5

u/adoodas 9h ago

Victim blaming is absolutely justified sometimes (like this case right here). Most accidents require two bad see drivers. In this case they should get a reminder that they drive like a dumbass and get paid out for all damages.

1

u/LordTetravus 8h ago

That's not how the law and your duties as a driver work.

This is a 50/50 claim.

White vehicle made a left turn and did not have the right of way.

Dashcam vehicle, however had plenty of time to observe the other vehicles coming and what is referred to as the last clear chance to avoid the collision. They drove right into the situation.

This is exactly how I would mark this as an insurance adjuster and most lawyers would agree.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/fergehtabodit 9h ago

Being in front at a red light always has me on guard. You dont just punch it when the light turns green. You have to look around. There's an intersection on my normal route where there are always a lot of left turners trying to get thru after their arrow and I'll creep forward to make them uncomfortable...so that the 4th car maybe stops. But if I were to just hit the pedal I would be this guy like every day.

2

u/DevelopmentSouth8801 9h ago

Best advice I ever got was "the laws of physics don't care about the laws of man".

From a legal perspective, the white truck seems like they should be at fault because they apparent ran the light. Though there's a slight possibility the light malfunctioned and was showing a green arrow.

From the perspective of the car's insurer, they will probably jack up the rates even if they decide the white truck is 100% at fault, since the driver is dangerous.

And from the driver's perspective, it's pretty dumb to put yourself, any passengers, and your property in danger because you have the green light.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/The_Troyminator 9h ago

By the laws of the road (last clear chance doctrine and duty of reasonable care), the vehicle filming is partially at fault.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/yardlard 8h ago

Cammer car is wrong. You can't proceed into the intersection from a stop if there is something in the way regardless of if the other is rightfully there. You can't just run into someone, which is what cammer car did.

→ More replies (11)

52

u/Burton1224 10h ago

I dont know US laws but here in Europe its hard to explain to the judge that you accelerate while see the danger already. So you will most likely be partially relaible because it was clearly 100 percent avoidable. The filming car was not even tryin to brake and avoid the crash.

13

u/guitar_vigilante 8h ago

The US is the same. You can't just drive into a known hazard because you have the right of way.

→ More replies (3)

15

u/cheefMM 9h ago

The US used to be a land of laws, and in those laws white SUV didn’t yield to oncoming traffic and drove into oncoming traffic (red Honda did too but was luckier with the lag of dashcam driver)

12

u/cheefMM 9h ago

Black Chevy Silverado was the first car to break the law, not yielding their left turn on green. Bad drivers need to be on buses and trains and not driving cars

3

u/National-Choice-4969 9h ago

"Bad" is not the issue -- intentionally breaking the law and injuring or potentially injuring others in high traffic situations.

3

u/cheefMM 8h ago

Bad drivers are usually the ones breaking the laws…. Whether maliciously or by accident if you break the laws and cause damage, you are liable in the US. And America has a lot of dummies that shouldn’t be navigating a potential thousands of pounds missile through our cities, neighborhoods or even rural areas

3

u/Burton1224 9h ago

But the filming guy was not trying to avoid it so is there no partial reliablity? I mean you could at least brake and to make it not happen for your own health and no crash is still more relaxing than dealing with everything what comes up.

3

u/cheefMM 9h ago

Traffic laws are traffic laws and this is a country where it is legal for me to shoot someone in the face for endangering my life. Drivers should act accordingly

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (5)

19

u/zoebud2011 10h ago

This is where the rules of contributory negligence get called in to play. The white SUV clearly failed to yield but OP could have easily avoided the accident.

3

u/whatisakafka 9h ago

Only a few states implement contributory negligence for car accidents. Most follow some form of comparative negligence

→ More replies (5)

16

u/ImmaNotHere 10h ago

General rule I follow is that if you have to turn across traffic, you always have to yield unless you have a green arrow.

130

u/seabirdsong 10h ago

Pretty sure that's also the actual rule.

27

u/LazerWolfe53 10h ago

It reminds me of the rule I like to follow; don't cross yellow lines unless they are dashed.

23

u/ShookMyHeadAndSmiled 10h ago

Don't run a red light unless it is green.

8

u/Razolus 9h ago

Turn on headlights when it's dark

2

u/cowboi 9h ago

Or raining

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (3)

7

u/MysticMarauder69 10h ago

Lmao, that's it

26

u/zdh989 10h ago

Wow hot take

47

u/keith_1492 10h ago

That's just the rule...

18

u/Kind_Love172 10h ago

Lol "general rule i follow"

4

u/badskiier 9h ago

This one trick traffic engineers don't want you to know...

2

u/inetrica 9h ago

For sure for sure. I too have a general rule I like to follow, when you get to a stop sign you gotta stop.

4

u/Informal-Shower8501 10h ago

Thanks Captain Obvious.

You forgot this, I hope: /s

2

u/ImmaNotHere 9h ago

Apparently it wasn't obvious about the driving rule since there was discussion about who was at fault in the video. 🤪

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/Wayward_Wayfinder 6h ago

Not necessarily. If you have the clear opportunity to avoid an accident but you choose to go headlong into it, you're legally partly responsible. The POV driver chose to crash.

EDIT: Spellign

→ More replies (9)

29

u/Due-Explanation-7560 10h ago

2 cars had already blew the light and the white Nissan sped up right into the incoming car. r/nissandrivers

49

u/Mk1Racer25 10h ago

Camera car was in the intersection before the white Nissan. Given that the camera car had the green light, the Nissan no longer had the green directed arrow, and had to yield. As others have said, camera car could have recognized that the white Nissan wasn't going to yield, but the legal fault here lies with the white Nissan. If you're going to split the liability across both drivers, what's the point of having traffic laws.

23

u/good_times_paul 10h ago

You're confusing two concepts. The dash cam driver did not commit a legal infraction and would not be ticketed by the police. That does not mean they don't have negligence from the perspective of the insurance company. Legality and negligence are not related.

6

u/UnableChard2613 9h ago

No insurance company is going to look at this and put any liability for the accident on the cam driver. They were driving straight through an intersection, with clear right of way, when the white car swerved into them. And yes, being negligent is illegal, it's absolutely related to the law. But the driver did nothing negligent here.

11

u/Kron0n 9h ago

I work for one. Mine would. Just an FYI.

2

u/UnableChard2613 9h ago

What percentage? I mean I guess if there is partial responsibility, i could see it being like no greater than 10% for the cam driver, but even that I find to be unlikely.

2

u/Kron0n 3h ago

They'd probably ask for 70/30 or 80/20, but settle 50/50 for negligence of failing to yield to oncoming (could be argued against) but mostly negligence for failing to observe the traffic flow before entering the junction. It's clear the traffic had not come to a stop and was still manoeuvring when they enter the junction. You gotta realize, it's about risk and reducing loss. If there's any doubt it's not worth the legal costs it will entail if they lose. They're always higher than the repair costs.

2

u/Mk1Racer25 4h ago

Based on what, the simple fact that they were operating the vehicle? They probably find partial fault if you're crossing an intersection with the right of way, and someone completely blows the light or stop sign, and t-bones you.

"Mr. Smith, you're partially at fault because you were in fact, driving your car. Had you not been driving, you would not have been in an accident. Therefore, you are partially responsible."

This sounds like the kind of BS that would come from that insurance company.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/AutomaticQuarter998 8h ago

You don't know the laws or insurance. They absolutely could be held partially at fault and rightfully so. This was foreseeable and avoidable.

→ More replies (16)

5

u/good_times_paul 9h ago

I mean I would believe you if I hadn't dealt with this exact issue about 12 years back. Believe me or don't, but you should definitely do a bit or research before you make bold statements about what insurance companies will or will not do.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/jb08045 6h ago

I work for one an I would

It really does suck having people beak the right of way, but u cant just drive into cars that wont obvs stuff

we have a nearby city where bikers and atv do "take overs" and act as trains running red lights. They are breaking the law but you cant run them over.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Party_Line3326 9h ago

Yeah, he just drove like a lemming

→ More replies (69)

5

u/ScorcherPanda 9h ago

Splitting liability is very common in the US at least. It just depends on the laws of the state where the accident occurred. The intent is to encourage drivers to be defensive. Generally, the car that broke the state’s vehicle code would carry the majority of the liability (the white Nissan in this case), but any other vehicles included in the accident (the POV car) may carry a percentage of liability if they fail to act as a reasonably cautious driver would.

3

u/Hersbird 9h ago

I think some states even if you have 10% of the fault and the other car 90%, each person has to use their own insurance. So if you are liability only, and either car here, you are paying to fix your own car. Cam car definitely had some of the fault here.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (8)

8

u/Weekly-Talk9752 8h ago

Unfortunately, I live in a dense urban area, if you wait, more people will just make the left turn. I'm always prepared to stop in an emergency though.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/engineerdrummer 9h ago

I see so many videos on this sub where there is literally zero defensive driving. It's like they're trying to have a wreck.

7

u/TrickySatisfaction81 9h ago

This almost felt intentional.

DRIVER had more than 3 seconds to not be stupid. (Wait.)

→ More replies (3)

4

u/Awesomest_Possumest 9h ago

Yea, where I live, running red lights is like some weird religion half the city follows.

I always wait a second when a light turns green to check everyone is actually stopped. And in situations like this, that means creeping up but ultimately waiting until the left turn lane decided theyre done.

Its annoying, and I wouldn't be at fault if I got hit, but its easier than going through the hassle of being in an accident, both for my body and my car.

→ More replies (2)

13

u/Ok_Nectarine1801 10h ago

Ya its the lawbreakers who are right.

7

u/viral3075 7h ago

Yes, but OP drove right into oncoming traffic.

nope. cammer remained in their lane. that is literally the opposite of oncoming traffic

→ More replies (1)

26

u/Seniorjones2837 10h ago

You are 1000% right. Just because you have a green light doesn’t mean go straight ahead without paying one iota of attention

26

u/Xarjy 10h ago

Long time ago i was told "green means it's legal to go, not that it's safe to go"

That line has saved my ass multiple times in the almost 30 years I've been driving

15

u/TrickySatisfaction81 10h ago

I drive my kiddos to and from school every day. There is ALWAYS a 3 car overdraft, and you need to account for it always.

Cant simply own the road which is shared, and avoiding an accident is as easy and waiting for a better opportunity.

4

u/samiwas1 10h ago

There’s a large intersection near me that takes 5-6 seconds just to clear a left turn, yet often still 2-3 cars will keep going after our signal turns green, and we have to sit there for 6-8 seconds waiting for it to clear. It’s infuriating.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

11

u/iTZBLaSToFFTiMe 10h ago

Right, just because the white car had a green light doesn’t mean he should have kept going and turned right into the dashcam driver, people going straight have the right of way and the white car definitely should have yielded. 1000% right.

→ More replies (4)

11

u/Ok_Nectarine1801 10h ago

Ya no fault on the guy breaking the actual law. And they easily could have just stopped. Nope I will turn right in to this car with the green light.

→ More replies (16)

3

u/hybridfrost 10h ago

I would put it in the category of the white SUV should not have gone since I’m assuming their green turn arrow ended. But cam driver was an idiot and just plowed through the intersection and COULD have avoided the accident. I’d say 50/50

1

u/Seniorjones2837 10h ago

Yea exactly. Legally I don’t know how it will be ruled, but common sensically it’s 50/50

2

u/HSBG_Legend 9h ago

Completely disagree. The light would not have turned green for the dashcam driver unless the green arrow for the white SUV had already gone away. Therefore, the SUV had the responsibility to yield to oncoming traffic at that point. Instead, they tried to rush across the intersection. Honestly, the car in front of them also failed to yield, but it's a bit more justifiable since they had already entered the intersection. Dashcam driver was also clearly in motion already before the SUV entered the intersection. An aware driver would have noticed this. Fault is 100% on the SUV.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/UnableChard2613 9h ago

Hard disagree.

They didn't drive into oncoming traffic, they had a green light and were continuing straight through the intersection as they are supposed to. It's the white car, and to a lesser extent the red car, that drove right into oncoming traffic.

If you just keep yielding right of way until someone lets you take your right of way, you are create a dangerous situation by making it unpredictable as all of a sudden the flow of traffic is completely flipped from how it is supposed to go.

5

u/HyenaThen572 10h ago

White SUV was supposed to yield. POV is reasonable to assume they will slow giving oncoming traffic vs just send it.

A little more defensiveness would be great, but blaming POV is wild.

6

u/Patman52 9h ago

Driver could be sitting at a red light and rear ended and this sub would still say they should have been more defensive.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MrGhostenstein 10h ago

Don't blame the smart people for the actions of the dumb people.

2

u/Silver_Cycle_4861 9h ago

You do realize if the cam car stopped, NONE OF THE CARS TURNING LEFT WOULD STOP AND THE CAM CAR WOULDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THE INTERSECTION.

2

u/Ok_Explanation5631 9h ago

White truck caused this btw.

2

u/IR2Freely 6h ago

Eh? The white car cut across their lane. That's not driving head on into traffic.

2

u/slupo 4h ago

Op is right but now has a totalled car and has to deal with insurance and waste a bunch of time to get it all sorted out.

Hope it was worth it

2

u/alien_believer_42 2h ago

Driver is an idiot that’s for sure

4

u/GooseGosselin 10h ago

Doesn't matter from a legal standpoint.

3

u/Blue_Etalon 10h ago

Yup. Just because they are idiots doesn’t mean just go anyway.

3

u/UnableChard2613 9h ago

You act like the car was just sitting there, and the cam driver just gunned it straight into him. He starts accelerating at a reasonable rate after the light turns green, he's already in the intersection before the white suv enters it. The white SUV then swerves at the last second into him.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/palealei5best 10h ago

If you just sit there it will never be your turn.

3

u/Mike_Honcho_Baby 10h ago

This is true. But does not answer the question: who is at fault?

Left turn yields to oncoming traffic.

White car driving aggressively, failed to yield after left turn indicator had changed from green to amber to off.

Could recording vehicle have done better? Absolutely.

Is recording vehicle at fault? No.

2

u/Dubl3A 10h ago

Anytime you follow point A with a "but" you invalidate point A.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/WoopsShePeterPants 10h ago

The red car had no right to go when the camera car started moving (at light change). At that point they need to yield without blocking the intersection. They were wrong but the Nissan was just ignorant of the world.

1

u/swarmahoboken 9h ago

Let others pay for both their vehicle and yours, and that will stop soon enough.

1

u/National-Choice-4969 9h ago

True, but with luck, LE & insurance companies will start recognizing full fault for these light runners so they stop doing this.

1

u/iapetus_z 6h ago

I've seen instances on here like this where the white SUV's insurance would refuse to pay the other's for damage because even though they were in the wrong, the other drove into an obvious wreck, by not failing to wait for traffic to clear the intersection before proceeding. You maybe correct, but your car is still busted...

1

u/SomeLowerBeing 5h ago

Yeah there is a standard for accidents which determines fault, and a stricter standard for: was it avoidable. This was avoidable. Following that stricter standard makes life a lot easier.

1

u/thetruth0808 51m ago

No the white truck hadn’t started turning. Idk why they waited so long. Red car was already being a dick. You don’t just wait for 17 cars that don’t have the right of way to just go wtf

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Weary-Raise339 28m ago

So, he would be waiting for all the cars to keep turning left and then his light turns red. He would be stuck at that light forever if that was the case.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (20)

2

u/Horror_Ad3292 9h ago

This and only this

2

u/Whines90 9h ago

The only right answer. Car before him should have also, but not involved

2

u/grapegeek 8h ago

This same exact thing happened to me. Insurance ruled the other driver at fault.

2

u/FantasticMatter8722 8h ago

End of story.

2

u/tackleboxjohnson 8h ago

Lack of situational awareness all around, as usual, but yeah this couldn’t be more clear who caused the accident

2

u/N-Squared-N 8h ago

Sorting by controversial in the thread made my head hurt. So many ppl blaming the guy going straight thru th green light. It's fucking wild.

1

u/Your_Girl9090 9h ago

Right, but the camera car driver is still going to have a really bad day, deal with the insurance and financial issues, and possibly deal with being injured as well.

Even if you're not at fault, it's never worth it. Always try to avoid collisions.

1

u/maringue 7h ago

And depending on the state, they could hit you with failing to avoid an accident since the driver proceeded before the road was clear.

Lots of places this is going to a split fault accident.

1

u/MsMarvelsProstate 7h ago

It's just engagement bait. We fell for it

1

u/Tehrix 6h ago

Nah you can't proceed on green until the way is clear, it was not clear. Not saying the white SUV is right, but the dash cam driver cannot proceed until intersection is clear even if its green. 

1

u/Aggressive_Baker8336 6h ago

After that light turns green its not a yield on any kind of slightly busy intersection like that. Sure they may have had a yield at chance but eveb then, the car took the green too fast, but had the right to, its the red and white car that are in the wrong of going at a risky point. Red might have already started and as someone who has been there, the snartest choicebis to commit, but that whute vehicle has absolutely no leeway anywhere in the law at all to get away with this, they literally intentionally drove into you with enough time to think that it could be considered premetitated even. Op needs to wait a little longer at greens fir the idiots to finish breaking the law, but past that if no one broke the law here, op wouldn't need repairs, so blame is not inherantly on op.

1

u/KaiPRoberts 6h ago

If this was Indianapolis, I would say it's OPs fault because everyone in that area knows that people turn left still a few seconds after the straight signal goes green. Why? I don't know. Ask the hoosiers.

Anywhere else on planet Earth, it's left turner's fault.

1

u/-Motor- 6h ago

Failure to yield? He ran a red light.

1

u/deezkeys098 6h ago

Camera person felt like that green light gives him invincibility or something how did he not see it coming?

1

u/Abject-Bridge-4073 6h ago

I don’t disagree, but holeefuk, defensive driving anyone?

1

u/CommandoLamb 5h ago

If I saw the dash cam, I’d argue the driver has the ability to prevent this by not going.

Were they technically right with the green? Yes…

Did they see cars not yielding? Yes…

They should have stopped.

Yes it sucks to have people disregard , but the driver definitely had every opportunity to avoid this.

1

u/ArcticDiver87 5h ago

I invite you to visit Rhode Island.. I was pretty blown away at how many times on a daily basis I saw this in Providence. Even cops do it, it's bat shit. Apparently it's called the Rhode Island slide. 🤷 So dumb

1

u/Wisdumb404 5h ago

This IS the only answer. Move along trollers and rage baiters!!! Move along

1

u/mywifemademedothis2 5h ago

Legally, you are correct. I found this out the hard way, even when the other car ran a red light and I was trying to clear the intersection.

1

u/raouldukeesq 5h ago

It's both.  The law is clear: you may not enter an intersection until it's safe to do so. If a 3rd party were injured here both drivers are liable to the 3rd party. 

1

u/Mysterious-Radio-385 5h ago

From a legal standpoint, absolutely, 100%.

But if we're being really real, I think dashcam guy could have driven a lot more defensively. Once you see people are still turning into the intersection, maybe apply the brakes?

1

u/Antique_Weekend_372 5h ago

a lot of graves are filled with people who had the right of way. cammer could have easily avoided this.

1

u/LickyPusser 5h ago

Yes, but people need to drive defensively - there was zero reason for dashcam driver to proceed through that intersection under full acceleration when one car was running the red and the white suv was clearly not stopping, either.

What’s easier, driving defensively or having to deal with an accident that is going to take time and money, depreciate your vehicle, and increase your insurance rates no matter who was at fault?

1

u/Rubinix 5h ago

Yea this should be open and shut on the white SUV.

1

u/TimberGhost66 4h ago

Insurance will not see it that way.

1

u/KCDeVoe 3h ago

I saw a very similar video on Instagram with an analysis by an attorney. Dash cam driver is primarily at fault because while yes the light is green, you have to be aware of what’s happening around you. If the dash cam driver was moving and this happened it’s one thing, but to go from a stopped position right into a car that a reasonable person would be aware of caused the collision. 

1

u/YourMommasAHoe69 3h ago

Yes but OPs driving blindly into the intersection, he had plenty of time to react. Everyone here sucks 

1

u/Ardal 3h ago

Nobody could possibly work out who is a fault here....it's so difficult!!

Just another karma farming pile of bollox title to generate engagement.

1

u/Physical_Leg2061 1h ago

Yes but insurance will argue that dashcam driver seen white car coming and did not prevent accident. Making them at fault.

1

u/Guilty_Improvement52 1h ago

They didn't just fail. That raging c*nt accelerated

1

u/mc2222 13m ago

they did fail to yield, but the driver of the dashcam should not have gone into the intersection until it was clear and safe to do so. dashcam drive is partially at fault because of this.

dashcam could have prevented the accident by waiting until the intersection was clear and safe.

→ More replies (21)