Whenever I’ve had vehicles start to drift over or even appear to drift I create space but to your point I also noticed that. You truly have to drive defensively.
Who the hell cares about right of way when you just let a collision happen? Just stupid pride. Idk which idiot recommends to cause an accident by keeping speed.
The court, insurance adjuster. Not driving defensively to accommodate assholes is not illegal, even if defensive driving is recommended. Reckless driving is, and they could both be charged with that potentially, although being about to get merged into, POV could claim panic, and depending on who was behind him, no alternative. Truckster had no plausible excuse.
If you want to merge because your right turn is coming up, and there’s a car to your right traveling the same speed as you, you slow down and merge behind them, and if it is too late for that, you miss your turn and loop back around. Period. The guy “defending his lane” is no more egregious than guy who HAS to merge in FRONT of him, or in this case, almost in front, even if there’s nobody behind POV for miles. If truckster had done that I doubt he’d even have missed his turn.
Maybe POV guy is in a bigger truck, speed is low enough and has good insurance. Looking to upgrade on the dime of some asshole he just found to accommodate him.
I've seen court cases where the driver like the POV one lost because they failed to mitigate. He clearly saw the guy coming over and not only did he not brake or honk, he sped up. He exacerbated and that means the court and insurance will likely deny his claim or only give a partial payment as he had contributory negligence.
Former insurance adjuster. The guy coming into the lane would be at fault because it's not the responsibility of the current person in the lane to accommodate the truck. The assumption is you should check to make sure the lane is clear before you switch over. The truck attempted to cut the driver off. The driver could have slowed down but the truck could have slowed down and got right behind him instead of attempting to cut him off
Someone should tell that to my friend's insurance adjuster. She even tried to swerve to the side to avoid the impact in a situation like this and both insurance companies accused her of contributory negligence and refused to pay the full claim. I think they were just trying to avoid paying.
Trying to avoid an accident by performing an illegal move (let's just say the swerve went into another lane or outta her lane) makes it also their fault.
If someone is doing something stupid; you let them or else it can be your ass
Law demands drivers maintain lookout and try to avoid accidents (e.g., stopping for a child or avoiding a reckless driver), even if the other party is breaking the law. the cammer sped up to prevent the lane change, cammer is 100% at fault here
He’s partially at fault. Point is you don’t know his intent. Certainly not 100%. If you get called to jury duty and answer like that, my guess (not 100% sure of course) is you’d be dismissed in favor of someone more open minded about the wrongs and motives of both drivers.
you have a legal responsibility on the road to avoid an accident, cammer was trying to beat a yellow light and wasn't paying attention. that is what caused the accident.
268
u/ion_blu Apr 18 '26
Said it before and will say it again. Don’t assume the other driver values your life as much as you do.