Kawasaki Sportsbike Riders Club - Australia - Online Forum

Thanks for the replies guys.
I am fully insured, the car is geting fixed, I am simply getting prepared to fight if I receive an infringement in the mail as I did not cause the accident yet as I was the rear most car they may fine me on technicalities.

You might not have caused the accident, but you have a duty of care to ensure that you don't rear end the car in front of you. Everyone in the line has the same duty of care and they'll all get the same ticket. When you say that you didn't cause the accident I'm assuming you mean the initial accident. I'm pretty sure they'll find you responsable for the part of the accident where you struck the car in front of you due to you not leaving sufficient braking distance, unless there was some other explanation for the situation, but thats something you'd end up explaining in court when you contest the ticket.

Also, when you contest a ticket here in Victoria the Police prepare a brief. It's no longer just a ticket. Statements will be presented from all the people involved including any victims, accused, witnesses and police. Any other information will also be presented like photos.

The worst bit of evidence you'll have working against you is the result. If the police pulled over a car the observed it following too closely, it's their observations stating that if there was an emergancy braking situation the car following would not have enough room to brake safely. In your case the proof is in the pudding. You did not leave enough safe braking distance resulting in you running into the car in front.

When you spoke to the insurance company did they say that you only have to pay for the damage you caused to the car in front of you?

Get legal advise first thing.

I can't wait to see what the result of your fight will be, it has me very curious.

I am most curious too and have a tendency to side with naked's thoughts however I was also told last year that it doesn't even matter if your stopped at a red light and someone runs into you resulting in you running into the person in front of you stopped that you are still liable for not leavin a big enough gap...I do also have my doubts on the reliability of this person though

Hope it all goes well for you without tooooo much hassle

i was under the understanding if you are STOPPED when you get hit from behind which then pushes you into the next car, its not your fault.
so long as your were STOPPED.

if you were braking hard, looking like making it, then get rammed and pushed into the car ahead, then yeah thats classed as your fault.

Wattie wrote:i was under the understanding if you are STOPPED when you get hit from behind which then pushes you into the next car, its not your fault.
so long as your were STOPPED.

if you were braking hard, looking like making it, then get rammed and pushed into the car ahead, then yeah thats classed as your fault.

I don't know, I'd argue the toss on that. But then again, I'm paid to be an argumentative bastard

When I was front car in a three car pile up a couple of years back they kept asking me how many bumps I felt, which I assumed was meant to determine who was at fault - ie one bump, the car at the end was at fault, two bumps both cars had some fault etc.

tomtom wrote:

Wattie wrote:i was under the understanding if you are STOPPED when you get hit from behind which then pushes you into the next car, its not your fault.
so long as your were STOPPED.

if you were braking hard, looking like making it, then get rammed and pushed into the car ahead, then yeah thats classed as your fault.

I don't know, I'd argue the toss on that. But then again, I'm paid to be an argumentative bastard

When I was front car in a three car pile up a couple of years back they kept asking me how many bumps I felt, which I assumed was meant to determine who was at fault - ie one bump, the car at the end was at fault, two bumps both cars had some fault etc.

I would hope that the reason would be to determine if the amount of force the rear most car hit with is consistant with the rest of the story. The RTA handbook specifically states (or did when I last read it) that you should leave enough room when stopped to still be able to see the tires of the car in front. Whether or not you are pushed into the car in front depends on how hard they hit you. Which is not in your control.

But back on topic. You will always be responsible for hitting the person in front unless you can prove that they moved in front of you right before the accident occured AND you didn't have enough time to brake to re-establish your crash avoidance space. Which really sucks if you are driving a 10 year car with good brakes but the run up the back of a brand new SUV capable of stopping on a 5 cent piece.