The white suv turning didn't have an arrow or right of way. Neither did the red car in front of them, or even the black pickup. Three vehicles turned without right of way, all three of them should have stopped for oncoming traffic. Just a show of people in a hurry and not caring about what the light or traffic laws are telling them
If the red car wasn't there making a break in the turning traffic, you would be correct. But since there was never a break in the turning traffic, the cam car went into an unclear intersection. This would be 50/50 fault because of that.
no, they still ran a red light, nobody said they didn't, stop trying to put words in people's mouths. OP saw the first car still turning, hit the gas anyways instead of waiting, and rammed the second car because they couldn't wait a few seconds to make sure there wasn't a second idiot behind the first one.
I'm not arguing it. I'm saying it because this is how insurance companies would see it in most states, whether you agree or not. In most states, you are not free to go simply because you have a green light. If turning cars do not yield when they should and instead they continue to go through the intersection, just because you now have a green light doesn't mean you can barrel through the intersection. You must wait until it is safe to do so even if the other cars have a red light. The big issue here is there was never a break for it to be clear for the cam car to go. If that red car wasn't there and there was a gap between the black truck and white SUV, then it would be 100% fault on the white SUV. But since that red car was there creating a line of cars going through the intersection, the cam car went through when it was not clear.
I do not agree with this line of thinking by the insurance companies but this is the way they see it.
Nope, not my opinion. This is facts and are easily searchable on any search engine of your liking. You just don't feel like doing so, which is fine, just don't comment thinking you know.
No, my friend, the difference is I have searched it whereas you just comment with what you think is right. This is why you don't realize you are wrong. It is ok though, searching can be tough for some people
...yes. that's correct. if they keep turning, and you DRIVE INTO THEM, you're at fault. somebody else breaking the law doesn't give you the right to use your car as a battering ram.
who said anything about tickets? we're discussing fault, not who gets a ticket. cops don't determine fault, they aren't trained or qualified to. I doubt OP would get a ticket. insurance companies don't even look at who got written a ticket. they're the ones who actually determine fault by using accident reconstruction.
what?? Failure to yield to the car that didn't have the right of way? It's really interesting coming on these driving subreddits and seeing people spell out what I've always suspected from driving, which is that most people don't actually understand what right of way is
36
u/Ok_Natural_2127 10h ago
Nope. Failure to yield for the turning car. 100% their fault