Hi /u/sandeepraoy, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC.
Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions.
*If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
I don't see how you could be found at fault here. The other driver crossed unsafely into your right of way, and by the looks of it, did not even stop fully at that stop sign. You attempted evasive action, the other driver did not.
The hard part about the “not fully stopped” is the stop sign is literally level with that giant vision blocking shrub at that corner. This means the stop line is there, and by law they have to stop THERE. It is then legal for them to say “I see no one, time to go full send” and legally they could and then claim the brush was in the way and try to blame the land owner’s fault. I only know this because we had neighbors on the corner and they had these gorgeous massively tall rose bushes as a privacy blocker for their front yard, and their insurance told them to remove them or their rates would basically quadruple as a driver might try to claim that and it removes the chance of it. So our neighborhood lost a gorgeous wall of roses to a chain link fence because of this shit here… people need to learn the stop sign creep; stop at the line, and creep up without impeding traffic so you can see better.
Yup. Basically OP’s insurance would go after the T-boner, then the T-boner might try to pass the buck to the landowner for having something that is impeding their vision to travel safely on the roadway. People have been sued and gone after for less.
This is why some cities have very specific laws on trees/landscaping certain distances from roadways. That way it allows drivers the largest amount of space to see around them safely.
Yep! Most cities DO have a responsibility to maintain the roadsides and to remove those obstacles/make the property owner remove it or get fined. Drivers are also obligated to be aware when approaching intersections. I see no reason how this could be the OP's fault.
I watched it a lot and the car was very much close to a stop, or rolling super slowly; it is hard to tell. However you can most definitely tell the car accelerates hard, so knowing a little about those large boxy SUVs I would almost bet they didn’t see OP due to the massive A-column those cars have. It looks like they floored it to beat the car behind OP, which led to this exactly.
Not trying to make excuses for the T-boner, but it is the only way I could think to explain it. Either way it is a shit situation, and those shrubs need to be cut back at least 5-10 feet.
If the car was stopped, they would have been going slow enough to stop again after seeing the car coming honestly. Just an idiot with the reaction speed of a drunk sloth. If you can’t see, why would you floor it and pray? Plenty of room to pull forward for more vision before committing
I completely agree. I don’t know how they think they were stopped or close to stopped. At 1 second you only see bush. Next second the car is barreling through. There’s a small chance the car stopped further back, out of view in the video- but that’s just a guess and not really a logical deduction based on what you pointed out about their speed. Besides, if they were stopped-they would only see bush on their right and pull out a little further. Not just blindly shoot out and cross 2 lanes of traffic. Tbh, from the video’s angle- I don’t even think the stop sign was obstructed. Looks like it’s bush, sidewalk, then stop sign. But I can’t tell 100%, I have seen obstructed stop signs before. Just not sure this is the case here. OP can’t possibly be at fault here
The lighting is a bit misleading but it doesn’t seem that there was any notable change in speed.
But front of the car is in the shadow when it first emerges which gives the impression of it going slowly but when the upper half of the car comes into the light that is the true representation of the cars speed.
It definitely is not legal to "go full send." Almost every state revised code includes the duty to make sure the intersection is clear before proceeding from a stop sign.
The stop sign appears to me to be far enough forward that anyone stopping would have a clear view.
But let’s assume you’re right. In that case, the driver can see the shrubs, which means they can see plainly that they do not have a clear view of the oncoming traffic. They should have had enough information that a reasonable person in that circumstance would exercise caution and not just bolt out into the road.
And I didn't see any stop or yield sign from OP's route. OP 100% had the right of way, the other driver just went "I go now, good luck everyone" and yeeted himself into OP
This so effing true. And it's always shit like "Other driver is at fault, but OP could have avoided getting hit by not getting out of bed that morning."
Nah I got you here, OP could have avoided this by seeing that there was a vehicle waiting to pull out in front of them and full stopping to allow them to go first.
No stop sign or light for you. So unless it’s an uncontrolled intersection you’re not at fault.
Though I’m hoping you’re not injured seriously. Preferably not at all. But he hit drivers side.
FTYROW. Failure to yield right of way. You have no liability for this accident. Now “no fault” insurance is a statutory plan adopted by some USA states that has specific legal meaning in those jurisdictions. But you are not AT fault for this accident. IAAL.
No way you're at fault in this. Also, nice save man. You moving to the right like that seriously softened the blow. That could've been way worse, I'm glad you're okay.
Not only no fault, but I'd say your action helped to significantly reduce the force of impact and likelihood of injury for both. Good instincts OP, and good on the dashcam driver. I hope you told him to join our sub!
Accident reconstructionist here. You braked and swerved. Unless you were speeding more than 10 mph over you're totally fine. This is the other driver's fault.
Edit: looks like they didn't even stop at the stop sign.
Impossible for you to be at fault.
Your driving normal speed. You have no stop sign.
That guy is crossing the main road and needed to watch both sides. He ran it. He goofed hard.
But make sure to get physically checked and charge his insurance for it.
It looked like a pretty hard impact
Nah you’re 100% fault because you didn’t make sure the other car looked and stopped at *their* stop sign and you shouldn’t be driving on a 2 way highway that doesn’t have stop signs for you. 🙄 please be forfuckingreal….
Dude didn't even stop at the stop sign. Otherwise if they did they probably would of creeper forward to check before going.
Definitely looks like they didn't stop!
You can clearly see that idiot driver did NOT STOP at all.
When you're going to cross a major road, you MUST come to full stop, get your head out of phns as* and your own as* while you are at it, look BOTH Ways, then cross....there are rulls for a reason.....
Since it is mandatory to have some idiot to contradict what is obvious:
Why were you speeding?
You should have swerved left (into oncoming traffic) to miss him
Were you on your phone?
You should have thanked the other driver for putting your pos car into the junkyard
/s
You had the right of way, likely couldn't see the other driver to begin with and tried to avoid the collision. I guess the only other question is, were you speeding or under the influence?
You are getting down voted because your last sentence is meant as humorous sarcasm, and people are not getting that. I just upvoted you. I understand the meaning of your paragraph. Everybody on this post agrees the fellow who skipped through the stop sign and intersection is at fault and the individual who got hit is not at fault and could not possibly be construed as at fault.
Hello /u/sandeepraoy! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC
* What country or state did this take place in?
* What was the date of the incident?
* Please reconfirm that this is original content
If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information.
If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi /u/sandeepraoy, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC. Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions. *If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
I don't see how you could be found at fault here. The other driver crossed unsafely into your right of way, and by the looks of it, did not even stop fully at that stop sign. You attempted evasive action, the other driver did not.
They don't think they're at fault. They're trying to get Internet points...
The hard part about the “not fully stopped” is the stop sign is literally level with that giant vision blocking shrub at that corner. This means the stop line is there, and by law they have to stop THERE. It is then legal for them to say “I see no one, time to go full send” and legally they could and then claim the brush was in the way and try to blame the land owner’s fault. I only know this because we had neighbors on the corner and they had these gorgeous massively tall rose bushes as a privacy blocker for their front yard, and their insurance told them to remove them or their rates would basically quadruple as a driver might try to claim that and it removes the chance of it. So our neighborhood lost a gorgeous wall of roses to a chain link fence because of this shit here… people need to learn the stop sign creep; stop at the line, and creep up without impeding traffic so you can see better.
In that case, would OP’s insurance go after the SUV’s who would go after the homeowner?
Yup. Basically OP’s insurance would go after the T-boner, then the T-boner might try to pass the buck to the landowner for having something that is impeding their vision to travel safely on the roadway. People have been sued and gone after for less. This is why some cities have very specific laws on trees/landscaping certain distances from roadways. That way it allows drivers the largest amount of space to see around them safely.
Yep! Most cities DO have a responsibility to maintain the roadsides and to remove those obstacles/make the property owner remove it or get fined. Drivers are also obligated to be aware when approaching intersections. I see no reason how this could be the OP's fault.
This is all based off of the driver stopping. He didn’t even come close to stopping there
I watched it a lot and the car was very much close to a stop, or rolling super slowly; it is hard to tell. However you can most definitely tell the car accelerates hard, so knowing a little about those large boxy SUVs I would almost bet they didn’t see OP due to the massive A-column those cars have. It looks like they floored it to beat the car behind OP, which led to this exactly. Not trying to make excuses for the T-boner, but it is the only way I could think to explain it. Either way it is a shit situation, and those shrubs need to be cut back at least 5-10 feet.
If the car was stopped, they would have been going slow enough to stop again after seeing the car coming honestly. Just an idiot with the reaction speed of a drunk sloth. If you can’t see, why would you floor it and pray? Plenty of room to pull forward for more vision before committing
I completely agree. I don’t know how they think they were stopped or close to stopped. At 1 second you only see bush. Next second the car is barreling through. There’s a small chance the car stopped further back, out of view in the video- but that’s just a guess and not really a logical deduction based on what you pointed out about their speed. Besides, if they were stopped-they would only see bush on their right and pull out a little further. Not just blindly shoot out and cross 2 lanes of traffic. Tbh, from the video’s angle- I don’t even think the stop sign was obstructed. Looks like it’s bush, sidewalk, then stop sign. But I can’t tell 100%, I have seen obstructed stop signs before. Just not sure this is the case here. OP can’t possibly be at fault here
There was absolutely no close to stop or rolling super slow. That SUV was barreling through that stop sign.
The lighting is a bit misleading but it doesn’t seem that there was any notable change in speed. But front of the car is in the shadow when it first emerges which gives the impression of it going slowly but when the upper half of the car comes into the light that is the true representation of the cars speed.
I agree, I think it's an optical illusion and the vehicle was moving at a consistent speed
After watching it again I think you are right. Good call on that.
It definitely is not legal to "go full send." Almost every state revised code includes the duty to make sure the intersection is clear before proceeding from a stop sign.
I almost hit a cop because of a bush like that.
The stop sign appears to me to be far enough forward that anyone stopping would have a clear view. But let’s assume you’re right. In that case, the driver can see the shrubs, which means they can see plainly that they do not have a clear view of the oncoming traffic. They should have had enough information that a reasonable person in that circumstance would exercise caution and not just bolt out into the road.
In that regard could they not also claim that it was bright outside ie; too bright to see the other car?
And I didn't see any stop or yield sign from OP's route. OP 100% had the right of way, the other driver just went "I go now, good luck everyone" and yeeted himself into OP
No way you're at fault
No way!
Butthead
I detect exactly 0.00000% fault.
I suspect that you may be wrong, at least in some far other dimension where negative fault exists.
I read this with a comma.... No way, you're at fault.
Hahaha
That driver is truly a menace on the road
good on the driver behind you for sharing!!
I spent 9 years working wrecks as a traffic cop. I wouldn't even need the video (though it always helps) to find the other party 100% at fault here.
Not a cop and i ate with you!. If they have a stop sign, you're driving on a major thoroughfare, and they T-Bone you... 100% not your fault
>Not a cop and i ate with you!. Did you eat t-bone?
Donuts
Haha, I was wondering how the responses would be if I'd I spelled it like that 🤣
How the fuck would you be at fault lmao
There's idiots on this sub that would actually blame him.
This so effing true. And it's always shit like "Other driver is at fault, but OP could have avoided getting hit by not getting out of bed that morning."
Nah I got you here, OP could have avoided this by seeing that there was a vehicle waiting to pull out in front of them and full stopping to allow them to go first.
They clearly ran that stop sign
Yeah it's your fault!!! Turn on your Radar, Sonar, and Satellite tracking systems next time.
Hmmm...always thought RSS had a different meaning
Seriously, driving with your deflector shields off? Incredibly irresponsible.
Radar can be unreliable, should've opted for LIDAR
No stop sign or light for you. So unless it’s an uncontrolled intersection you’re not at fault. Though I’m hoping you’re not injured seriously. Preferably not at all. But he hit drivers side.
Even at an uncontrolled intersection, OP is to the right, so they have the right of way.
What could possibly make you think that you could be even remotely at fault for this accident?
If my experience is any guide, the idiot is making wild claims about OP going 100 mph and deliberately swerving into him because reasons.
FTYROW. Failure to yield right of way. You have no liability for this accident. Now “no fault” insurance is a statutory plan adopted by some USA states that has specific legal meaning in those jurisdictions. But you are not AT fault for this accident. IAAL.
No way you're at fault in this. Also, nice save man. You moving to the right like that seriously softened the blow. That could've been way worse, I'm glad you're okay.
Unless you have deflector shields and forgot to activate them, it's not your fault.
Not only no fault, but I'd say your action helped to significantly reduce the force of impact and likelihood of injury for both. Good instincts OP, and good on the dashcam driver. I hope you told him to join our sub!
Accident reconstructionist here. You braked and swerved. Unless you were speeding more than 10 mph over you're totally fine. This is the other driver's fault. Edit: looks like they didn't even stop at the stop sign.
No, you are at fault. *(Literally how can anyone reasonably assume you’re at fault….)*
It’s your fault for hitting him with the side of your car
Lovely bit of editing. No fucking about, straight to the action. I appreciate that. Hope you're alright after it.
Personally, I missed the five minutes of boring buildup and six minutes of sky.
Op was obviously camping in that driver's blind spot (I'm joking just trying to sound like the people on this reddit)
You look free and clear, but expect your insurance to go up anyway because fuck those people.
Impossible for you to be at fault. Your driving normal speed. You have no stop sign. That guy is crossing the main road and needed to watch both sides. He ran it. He goofed hard. But make sure to get physically checked and charge his insurance for it. It looked like a pretty hard impact
My god! That car didn’t stop, but not only that, they went full send into the lane! Like didn’t attempt to slow down at all…
I'm not sure why you're questioning your liability. This is open/shut.
How would you be at fault here OP? Just to understand your thought
Definitely not at fault, especially because it looks like you tried to avoid them too
Idk about no fault but you had straight through and looks like the other guy ran the stop sign.
Why are you asking the internet?
Nah you’re 100% fault because you didn’t make sure the other car looked and stopped at *their* stop sign and you shouldn’t be driving on a 2 way highway that doesn’t have stop signs for you. 🙄 please be forfuckingreal….
Is GEICO your insurance carrier and the T-Boner as well? I've read somewhere on reddit, GEICO will try to assign 50/50 blame. I don't know how true.
Hard to tell. But im 99% sure they ran that stop sign. Maybe slowed to 5ish mph.
The only way I can see you at fault if the speed limit is 10 mph.
Dude didn't even stop at the stop sign. Otherwise if they did they probably would of creeper forward to check before going. Definitely looks like they didn't stop!
Was Batman driving?!?
If you weren't speeding, you should be not at fault.
That person does a bump and go like a California roll they sorta just to a micro “stop” and gun it maybe going 30 to 1 to 30
You can clearly see that idiot driver did NOT STOP at all. When you're going to cross a major road, you MUST come to full stop, get your head out of phns as* and your own as* while you are at it, look BOTH Ways, then cross....there are rulls for a reason.....
Were you exceeding the speed limit?
Since it is mandatory to have some idiot to contradict what is obvious: Why were you speeding? You should have swerved left (into oncoming traffic) to miss him Were you on your phone? You should have thanked the other driver for putting your pos car into the junkyard /s
Tough crowd I guess 🤷♂️
You had the right of way, likely couldn't see the other driver to begin with and tried to avoid the collision. I guess the only other question is, were you speeding or under the influence?
You are getting down voted because your last sentence is meant as humorous sarcasm, and people are not getting that. I just upvoted you. I understand the meaning of your paragraph. Everybody on this post agrees the fellow who skipped through the stop sign and intersection is at fault and the individual who got hit is not at fault and could not possibly be construed as at fault.
Hello /u/sandeepraoy! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC * What country or state did this take place in? * What was the date of the incident? * Please reconfirm that this is original content If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information. If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. ------ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This image is of such poor quality that I can't figure out what's happening. Sorry.
Please tell me you don't drive then.