In Britain it would be the tailgater, for not leaving enough space to react in case of an emergency.
There might be a civil case about whether the brake-checker caused injury because of their action, but that’s a separate issue.
6 Likes
I was in an accident years ago where I rear-ended someone on a mountain road at night after sliding on ice in a blind curve. (That was my fault). But the guy I hit insisted we don’t move the cars because he wanted to take pictures. But we were in a blind curve! An ICY blind curve!! At night!!! My then-girlfriend (now wife) was the only person with common sense in the situation and very clearly stated that we were in a very dangerous spot and we need to get our asses out of the blind curve. But the guy I hit was still insisting he take pictures. And of course moments later a car came around the curve, slid on the ice and hit our car. And then another. And then another. Duh.
5 cars in all.
So - the point is - ultimately the fault was shared among a lot of people. We were partially at fault because we created a hazard by stupidly staying in the dark, icy blind curve when we didn’t need to. The people that hit us were also partially at fault for not being able to stop in time.
If you create a hazard, you can be at fault. Even if you are rear-ended or you’re being tailgated.
So - brake-checking creates a hazard. It’s reckless. If you do it and cause an accident you will likely share the fault.
Tailgating is ALSO a hazard. But we all already know rear-ending someone gives you at least some (if not all) of the fault, depending on the situation.
3 Likes
That’s not the same as moving at highway speed on a straight road. In all honesty, the two situations aren’t comparable at all, and would be treated differently by most law enforcement / insurance.
5 Likes
The Tailgater is at fault-always as with any rear-ender it is always the person behind. Although you should ‘keep right except to pass’, take a look at the on-ramp approaching with vehicles approaching. This person had every right to continue driving the speed they were. As the tailgater passed the truck with the dashcam he was already tale-gating. Not to mention after the person had hit the brakes one more time, they did move to the right lane. If this tail-gater was not following so close they would have been able to control their vehicle and hit their own brakes, causing no further trama. I drive a lot in Texas and have to say people there do follow too close and without a doubt, more accidents I see are a result of the car behind causing the accident by ramming in to the car in front of them and/or swerving in to the ditch or other lane causing further problems. . Unfortunately, even where the signage may display “left lane is for passing only” or “keep right except to pass”, this is rarely the case but that still doesn’t mean the person that is in that left lane is ever at fault. If the speed limit is 60mph and that car is driving the speed limit, there is likely no legal action to be had, especially when there is an on-ramp with traffic approaching. They had every right to STAY in that left lane.
4 Likes
Completely agree. A light tap brake check after being tailgated like that is a harmless way of communicating to the driver following you. Harmless if that driver following you is actually competent enough to be on the road. This tailgater obviously wasn’t. Brake checking is only dangerous if another driver makes it so.
8 Likes
You have no way to know what speeds were being driven. The guy was passing people in the right lane. He was driving faster than that flow of traffic and was utilizing the roadway as intended.
6 Likes
Of course it matters why he slowed down. If he slowed down to avoid an obstacle, that would be one thing. But he slowed down to become the obstacle, creating unsafe roads conditions that directly led to this crash.
1 Like
Completely agree and I would like to add some information…
The speed limit on that section of Interstate 41 is 70 mph, it is posted about two miles earlier, here.
There was a sign indicating “Slower Traffic Keep Right”, this was about one mile earlier, here.
According to Google Earth, the distance from the first moment we see the “brake-checker” car to the moment it passes the second overpass (Vandenbroeak Rd) is 0.53935 miles (868 meters). According to the video the car travels this distance in 28 seconds. Therefore, this means that the “brake-checker” was going at 69.35 mph at that time.
The “brake-checker” car was not traveling too slow as to be required to keep right.
(edited for tiny typos and clarity)
19 Likes
Somewhere there is a children’s parable in here…
“And then Mr. Turtle brake-checked Mr. Rabbit, causing Mr. Rabbit to skid out of control, and proving that you can win a race by going slower, if your timing is just right.”
7 Likes
Very punny. Haha
2 Likes
Agree with this. Brake checker should have pulled over to begin with and let him pass but that is a far lesser offense; tailgater has serious issues if he is going to drive up someone’s ass and then jerk the wheel like that.
4 Likes
Brake checking doesn’t mean you’ve actually slowed down. It’s possible to tap the brake pedal enough to make the lights flash without making an appreciable change in speed.
10 Likes
Please. The “brake checker” was going fast enough to pass. The tailgaiting moron was CLEARLY in the wrong. He got what he deserved.Glad he did not hurt anybody. Only other self centered, tailgaiting fools are gonna take the type A turd’s side. I see this as someone threatening me with a 2 ton object. What gives you the right to do that to me? A car length for every 10 miles per hour is THE LAW. If I judge that I have to apply the brakes? I apply the brakes. You are supposed to be back away from me far enough so you can react in a safe manner.
9 Likes
They are different in a lot of ways. But there’s a key concept that applies in both situations. “Creating a hazard”. My take on the video is that the brake check very clearly caused the tailgater to lose control. That’s reckless and very clearly creates a hazard (IMHO). They were BOTH reckless (again, IMHO). I would bet money that if both parties were actually to get into a suit that the brake-checker would not get off without sharing some of the blame. How much I don’t know. Personally I find them both irresponsible but the tailgater was much more of an aggressor in the situation and I would give that person the lion’s share of fault.
2 Likes
When would you suggest that the brake checker should have pulled over? When there was a car merging in from the right that he would have come into conflict with?
7 Likes
I don’t think you can prove a break-check from this video. Is it even against any laws? Is break-checking a legal term?
OTOH, you can most likely use this video to prove tailgaiting, which is definitely a no-no.
6 Likes
I don’t know about you, but I was taught to add a car length of space for
every 10 miles of speed my vehicle is moving at. If that car had had to
suddenly stop for any reason, brake check aside, the outcome would have
been the same. Maintaining a safe following distance is in your own best
interest.
11 Likes
This!
If you, as a driver, are so annoyed by what another driver is doing, that you’re willing to risk causing an accident in order to teach the other driver a lesson, you’re nine-tenths of the way to road-rage yourself.
4 Likes
Two points worth considering:
-
Someone in front of you cannot cause you to get into an accident by maliciously hitting their brakes if you’re following at a safe distance. Tailgating is a type of reckless driving that puts both vehicles in danger. It’s an accident waiting to happen.
-
Everyone assumes that the car in front was hitting their brakes maliciously to frighten or cause the tailgater to get in an accident. Do we have enough information to judge that the person in the front car was not reacting to something in the road, or a bee in the car that just stung the driver in the eyeball, or the passenger freaking out and hitting the driver? How about the driver having a seizure or a stroke? No, we don’t have enough information. And when you’re in the following car you don’t have enough information, even if you’re driving dangerously close to the car in front of you. That’s why you should always leave plenty of room to slow down in case the car ahead of you has a legitimate reason or no reason at all for slamming on the brakes.
19 Likes
I don’t disagree. A combination of two drivers’ poor decisions led to the accident, including tailgating. My point is that, but for the brake checker’s decision to brake check with another car right behind him, there would not have been a crash.
1 Like
