So, looking through the above comments it appears I’m in somewhat of a minority in giving equal responsibility in wrongdoing to both parties here. Tailgating is wrong and stupid, but break-checking a tailgater is just as bad in my opinion.
2 Likes
Insurance companies would disagree with you.
Hit someone from behind and its your fault.
6 Likes
Read the second paragraph of my comment.
1 Like
I concur both are responsible parties to the events that happened. But from a “fault” standpoint it is entirely on the tailgater.
While having someone drive slow in the passing lane is aggravating, I would never EVER tail gate them. You can honk, flash your lights, even pass them on the right if need be. But tail gating them is entirely on you and stupid.
5 Likes
Insurance companies just want to get out of paying a claim. If their insured party is the tailgater they might well blame the brake-checker.
2 Likes
but they won’t and can’t.
I had someone’s rear end pushed into the side of my car. My own insurance company still blamed me.
Hit the back end of someone and you are at fault. end of story on that.
2 Likes
Hence why I never filed a claim when an SUV in front of me switched into reverse (to let a car ahead of them into the parking lot) and rammed into me. Figured my insurance would benefit by claiming I was at fault and that I had rear-ended the SUV. In a he says she says argument, people are going to side with horses instead of zebras. (I need to get my metaphor mixer fixed 
)
However, what insurance companies do isn’t necessarily the same as the law…
2 Likes
You are always responsible for being able to stop your car in a safe way. Period, the end. Tailgater could not, therefore he crashed. The brake-check may not have been strictly a nice thing to do, but it’s not wrong or illegal. I also saw no indication that the brake-checker was driving unsafely slow, which, if he were, would not justify the tailgater’s behavior.
6 Likes
I’m sorry that happened to you, and while your reaction is probably rational and reasonable I would go full Captain Ahab on that shit.
3 Likes
There are lots of reasons the driver in the lead car may have pressed their brake pedal. We all assume it was to send a message (and it probably was), but there are lots of other possibilities we can’t rule out (turning off cruise control, leg spasm, spilled coffee, bee sting, etc…).
8 Likes
The tailgater. I despise tailgating.
4 Likes
I would usually say the tailgater. The only time the tailgater would be in the right is if the car in front was traveling well below the speed limit and other cars couldn’t get around, however this doesn’t seem to be the case here-- chances are if the front car pulled into the slow lane the tailgater would just have begun tailgating another car further up the road, since there was a good amount of traffic ahead.
3 Likes
If you are being tailgated, increase your following distance. This is especially true if you are on a motorcycle.
1 Like
I did, I was responding to the first paragraph. You second paragraph doesn’t excuse the first.
1 Like
One fact we know from the video is the person is tailgating, you can’t dispute that. Maybe he had a good reason to, like a medical emergency, but if that were the case he could have just gone around. Regardless of reason, he was doing it and it can be proved from the video. But, how do we know the person in front actually applied the brakes in a brake check move? Maybe they realized they were speeding. Maybe there was something in the road. Maybe they got scared of the person behind them and panicked and their physical response was to apply the brakes. Maybe they dropped their latte. And yes, maybe they brake checked him, but we really don’t actually know. If this were taken to court you’d have to prove the person in front was actually intentionally applying the brakes in order for the person behind them to have an accident. You can’t prove that. Which is why it’s almost ALWAYS the fault of the person who hits the person in front when it comes to insurance claims.
9 Likes
F YOU tailgater. Justice is served.
2 Likes
I might have, but it was under the deductible and state reporting requirement…so, not worth the hassle.
1 Like
What’s to excuse? Your disagreement with the findings of a study does not invalidate the study. If you have a problem with the results of those studies, take it up with the investigators.
1 Like
unfortunately rarely do the Police get involved with fault any longer. Unless you commit a moving violation (which brake checking is not in fact a violation, though can lead to one) the cops will state the facts and allow the insurance carriers to determine fault. In which the majority will state whoever was behind is at fault.
1 Like
The tailgater was clearly at fault. I don’t think the brake-checker was intending to cause an accident. As others have said, there is only one way to communicate with a vehicle behind you when you’re stuck in a position that you can’t move over.
Just to play devil’s advocate here, how does anyone know with certainty this person was brake-checking? The tailgater was clearly and obviously being an asshole but how do we know the other driver was brake-checking and didn’t simply panic or do something instinctual?
They were clearly driving faster than right lane traffic and clearly passed someone else merging in from the right, but do we know that they were paying close enough attention to realize the car on the right was in their blind spot when they noticed the tailgater? Maybe they didn’t notice the tailgater immediately and when they did started to panic, without signalling they did a shoulder check and instinctively when they saw someone in their blind spot at the moment they were about to turn the wheel they tapped the brakes?
6 Likes
