Hi OzBargain team,
Another new user with a traffic question! I’ve been lurking for years and keep meaning to make an account. This has pushed me to do it.
I’ll preface this question by saying I’m in no way trying to get out of liability for this traffic collision. If my insurer says I’m liable then I’ll go with it. It’s only a $1000 excess and I’ve been driving for over 15 years without any accidents or traffic infringements, including parking fines. I’m trying to gauge whether or not the community sees the lack of care for the road worthiness of their vehicle as a liability issue. You’ll see what I mean below.
Background:
I was driving along the freeway in Perth and traffic was flowing pretty smoothly. There had just been a slower patch but things were speeding back up. All of a sudden the ute in front of me starts to slow down without warning. The key thing here is there was absolutely no warning apart from the vehicle slowing down. The ute’s brake lights were not working. Neither of them. And a canopy fitted meant there was no high mounted brake light either.
I noticed the braking too late and went into the back of the ute. No damage to their vehicle at all but mine sustained a fair amount to various panels and to some items under the bonnet.
Maybe I could have braked harder, maybe not. Looking back I was indecisive because of the lack of warning and didn’t realise how hard they were going to brake. As you’ll see in the dash cam video, the ute in front of the vehicle I hit swerved to avoid the car in front of it. I was also trying to avoid the Mini Cooper behind me from going into me by not jamming on my brakes if possible.
I believe that had the brake lights on the ute been working I would have had at least 1-2 extra seconds to process the scene and come to a stop without hitting anything.
My insurer is going to assess the footage and get back to me but the bloke I spoke to said it will probably still be my fault technically due to safe stopping distances etc. He isn’t in the assessment department though. My argument is that I was at a safe distance had the brake lights been working.
I also question why I should be liable for another persons lack of care and maintenance of their vehicle letting it get to the point of being unroadworthy.
Dash cam video here
Note I have blurred the license plate of the ute but nothing else has been altered. It might look like I got a shove from behind but my best explanation for this is the ute stopped suddenly and I kept going so it seems like an optical illusion on camera. Being there in the drivers seat that is how I remember it.
My question for the community given the background info and after watching the video is should I be liable for the traffic collision (yes 100%, no not at all or yes, partly liable)? In true OzB fashion I’ll add a poll to the post.
Again, I’m not trying to get out of it and this is the wrong place to do that. I’m genuinely curious what the community thinks about the situation.
Have you been in a similar situation? How did your insurer assess your liability? Did you challenge their decision if they did find you liable? I’m curious about this as I’m sure it’s more common than I’d believe with the number of old bombs and lack of vehicle maintenance oversight in most jurisdictions of Australia. I know NSW have yearly inspections for certain vehicles but most other states don’t. In the UK and NZ I believe they have mandatory periodic inspections in order for the vehicle to be registered/licenced. Is this something we should look at across all of Australia too?
TL DR
I was in a traffic collision where I rear ended someone with faulty brake lights that weren’t working. Discussing liability issues around vehicle road worthiness or lack of when in a TC.
As per usual the 'experts' on OzBargain assert bullshit.
I'm not going to tell you that the other guy is at fault. I'm not going to tell you that you're at fault. What I am going to say is that liability for road accidents is not determined by law.
People here are parrots and love doing the whole "you hit him, you're at fault" but the truth of the matter is that mechanical failures that contribute toward an accident absolutely change the circumstances. In your position, as you say, the excess is low, and the damage is to your car. What that means is that the absolute idiot that can't maintain a set of working tail lights is going to avoid engaging with his insurance (if he has any) at all costs.
Submit your claim and when the insurer finds you to be 100% at fault (which they will almost always do if their out of pocket is under a certain dollar value, which is partially mitigated by withholding your excess), lodge an escalation with the claims team. They will look at your dash cam video, see that the driver in front experienced a mechanical failure that diminished your time to react, and they will find you either not at fault, or they will find you partially at fault. Both of those are better for you than being found at fault as at least the stupid a-hole will be out of pocket for his sh*theap car contributing to accidents.
There will be people who will disagree with me but you should ignore them because they are wrong.
Edited to add: In the future if you see a car that has failing brake lights, get the hell out from behind them ASAP.