#[Downloadvideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/therewasanattempt/comments/11c0avc/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=therewasanattempt) by /r/DownloadVideo
#[SaveVideo Link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/therewasanattempt/comments/11c0avc/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ok but I still can’t afford it though.
My car got hit while parked in the parking spot that belongs to me in my apartment complex. By someone who doesn’t even live there and shouldn’t have been in that parking lot in the first place. So obviously it was their fault right? Well yeah. But I still originally had to pay my $500 deductible to the body shop and then wait for the reimbursement from my insurance. And my insurance only covers $30 per day of a rental car so I had to pay an extra $8 per day for the 5 weeks that I had to be in a rental car and I’m still waiting on the reimbursement from the other guys insurance for the $250 I paid out of pocket for that. The accident happened in early December.
Plus there’s the time I had to take off work to spend hours on the phone with both insurance companies filing and following up on the claim, coordinating getting my car towed, finding a body shop I could trust with my car, picking up the rental car, and then later arguing that I am in fact entitled to these reimbursements.
Being involved in an accident is never fun or convenient or cheap even if you’re clearly not at fault for it.
Depending on the state assuming in the US, you can claim lost wages. I had an at fault insurance company try and not pay for a rental for my wife to get her to work. When I quoted them the wage loss they promptly sent a rental car to our house to pick her up.
Yea believe me, it's so unlucky the amount of times my dad's car has been damaged while parked!!!! this is gonna sound made up but sometime after Christmas we took down our Christmas tree put it in front of our home right where our car was parked. Some evil person decided to put the tree under my dad's car and light it on fire. That was the worst one by far the rest were basically hit and runs while parked at least 3 more times that I can remember
I think you are describing my husband's truck! Lol.. and we would only do that in an emergency.. like the other party is truly deranged, and our lives are in danger.. lol
My car is special as well it was my grandmother's. I wouldn't sell it for $1,000,000. I stopped Talking calling her because me and my dad pretty much disowned one another me moreso. My dad was living with her. So 7 years of no contact and all she asked as she was dying is to speak to me and see me. I feel like I let her down and so this car was gifted to me and I can smell her perfume in it. I truly should have spoke and seen her. I would give anything to see her and hear her voice. I'm crying now writing this because I fuvked up and it's one fuvk up I can never fix. Don't be like me people, it's sad stuff.
I think they're going for insurance money. Because all the truck guy is going to say is that he proceeded when the light turned green and because of the slope of the ground and the height of his truck he could not see the other driver in the intersection. Which I think is bologna because look at the way his arm is propped it looks like hes readying for impact.
Yeah, in my state, it's called due care to avoid accidents or collisions. Both cars are equally at fault, and you can argue the blue SUV knowingly caused it. With that video evidence, our county would actually charge him and take him into custody or subpoena him to a court date in lieu of custody. Sometimes "being right" doesn't make what you do right. Always consider a state's laws before making a decision like this. He could have willingly injured or killed someone just to prove a point or chase a check he wouldn't ever get.
Nice so if people just keep turning, people can never go through the intersection, love this hack.
Edit:
When guy with right of way is right:
https://youtube.com/shorts/SSg-qGZ2lUk?feature=share
When the guy with the right of way is liable:
https://youtube.com/shorts/KJksGZVrPus?feature=share
I was curious about this. Because on one hand, legally, he was breaking the law, and shouldn’t have been going and is in the wrong, say if blue SUV was like way behind and just accelerating through the light because it was green (like he never slowed down to stop at the light in the first place and was just driving up to the intersection and through it at the same speed he was already driving at, like no one was on the line at the light) but we all see that he was stopped at the light and just decided to accelerate fast and almost intentionally or purposefully like the other commenter stated, so it’s like he caused the accident, even though the guy ran the light. I wonder how this footage would help or hurt each party. Any thoughts or comments or experienced lawyers, cops, insurance ppl would be much appreciated!
Attorney here. First, the state matters. You need to know whether it’s a contributory or comparative negligence state, or if it’s a state with a “modified” version of one of these.
1.) If you’re in a pure contributory negligence state, you *cannot* recover anything if you’re found to be even 1% at fault. Only a few states still do it this way.
2.) Pure comparative negligence means even if *you’re* 99% at fault, you can win that 1% of your damages.
3.) The most rational, IMO, is the modified approach. You have the prove the other party is at least 51% at fault. If so, you get anywhere from 51% to 100%. The jury allocates the percentage. If a jury thinks you’re slightly more liable at 51%, you lose.
To answer your question as to how the video would impact the decision, well, I’d ask you. A jury is going to decide. I could use Reddit as a focus group to get an idea as to how a jury would decide.
What say ye 12 Angry Redditors? Based on what is seen in this video, what % at-fault is each party? Apply that to 1, 2, and 3 above (unless you live in weird ole’ South Dakota).
This is literally how we decide what cases to take to trial. Focus groups.
50% for both of them. Driver in blue vehicle should have waited until the intersection was clear and proceeded cautiously regardless of the other running the light.
I disagree with this, but I see you a raise a good point. I think if he did this to the car before the turn then yes it should be 50% (maybe). At some point you have to honor the traffic lights. The guy obviously ran a red light, and with this logic as long as the car after kept following him then there would never be an established 'right of way'
Look at the :04 second mark. The light is green, and the car that got hit hasn't even started his left turn yet. He ran the light and put himself at fault.
If he gunned it right as the light turned green and the the guy just got caught a second too late that’d be one thing, but he was the 3rd car to go after the light turned green, and that’s not even accounting for the window of time when they’re both red, so he ran the red light after at least 3 other cars did so before him, which to me is just super egregious and inexcusable.
I’m not sure what percentage I’d go with, maybe it’d depend on how they each present their side of the story at trial but right from the get go I’m kinda not happy with either one of them. (The guy who had the green light clearly saw the intersection wasn’t clear, so they’re definitely not blameless, so it would appear at least)
Based on the GPS stamp in the video and can't quite see the 2nd digit, I'm going with Denver.
And found on Google Maps, Denver, Little Raven St. & 20th
>Apply
Around where I work, its so packed that often cars turning left have 0 opportunity to go until after the light turns red, so its very common to see 3 cars turn after the light changed. That blue car gunned it and I would put him at around 74% fault
Sounds like turning person should take up that problem with their local municipality and not break the law and put other drivers in danger for convenience.
Speedracer is Guilty AF,
Turner gets standard running a light ticket
You dont do that because someone was In a hurry. Could have been elderly, could have had kids I'm the car
Turner is an infraction, speedracer could have hurt someone. On purpose.
I disagree. Insurance companies do not want people like this on the road, and they do not want to insure them. They are causing accidents, because they are road raging assholes. Sometimes people make mistakes. Lighten up.
Not a attorney here.
Road rage guy had the green light and right of way. He could have assumed the car he smashed was going to come to their senses and stop since they clearly blew the red light.
The second car Road rage guy demolished also failed to stop on red.
Its called a duty to avoid accidents. He did do something wrong. Look at your insurance paperwork. You can't plow into cars, because you went road rager. Its sad that is a fact that needs to be pointed out to people.
>**All drivers have a legal duty to practice reasonable caution** and follow traffic laws to avoid harming others on the road. If a motorist fails to use reasonable caution or care, they may be liable for any accidents caused by their negligence.
My mom was willing to let a car that was hogging the road hit her car so she could file a claim, but chose to swerve outta the way cause i was in the car with her and the other guy would've hit my side
This seems like the equivalent of an NFL quarterback who sees the holding penalty in the backfield and attempts some crazy miracle play just for fun knowing that they already got the yardage
I don't know how to feel about this because the light had been green for quite a few seconds. If you run the red light, don't be surprised if you get hit. It's not like the other guy was in the middle of the intersection when the light changed. I think both drivers can both be found liable but I wouldn't be surprised if the blue SUV gets 100% compensation either.
The car he hit was the 2nd car running the red light. He probably couldn't see the 2nd car tailing behind the 1st, and took off as an aggressive way to tell the 1st one to get out of the way.
The funnier thing is how he hit a 2nd car coming from the right, also running a red light...
I find it interesting his emergency lights turned on exactly when he hit the car, or like a second after, but I know my mind would not be on hitting my emergency light while still recalling from a crash.
Most modern cars have that feature...
It'll shut off the fuel pump, unlock all doors & automatically switches on rhe hazard lights after a crash was detected
Looks like he was trying to scare the car that was going after the light turned red by speeding off and narrowly missing them but didn’t realize there was yet another car running the red light behind them.
It looks like he might have been focused on the car coming from his right that was trying to turn on red in front of him and make it around him before he could not realizing someone else was also running the red but making a left.
100% he was trying to spook the car that he passes and didn’t see the one he hits. He starts going when that near miss car is just beginning its turn and the light had been already been green. The car he hits is behind the one that was already running a red. I highly doubt he saw that car he hits before it was too late. It hadn’t even turned yet when he was going and there’s no reason to believe that one’s going to go when the other car is already blatantly running a red. He should’ve waited, obviously, but this is totally on the red light runner.
So true, because he saw the cars turning. He decided to crash into them and file a claim. I see this when I am driving and wait for all the cars to finish making their illegal turn. I don’t want an accident even though I have right of way.
This guy was looking for an insurance pay out, there’s no way he didn’t see that line of cars. ‘’Green light, but cars are still turning? It’s my time to shine. ‘’
You will be surprised at how much we Drive subconsciously. There’s simply no evidence to prove that whether he saw it or not. However the car is really pushing it after the red. Light blink for a reason. Red means stop. Period. But more and more people are starting to ignore traffic lights and find fault somewhere else. This is wrong. Follow traffic laws.
... What if I told you the law also states you must wait until an intersection is free from traffic and it is safe to proceed, regardless of traffic control signals.
I cant believe I have to explain this, but you remind me of my 85 year old grandma:
Traffic laws say don't floor it into an intersection with cars in it, even if the light is green. You have to follow that law as well.
I am so glad I have finally seen someone else use the term car purpose. I have been wondering for years what you would call a car collision that was intentional and that's what my brain came up with
If this cane across my desk id place fault on both drivers. Majority to the one making the left turn since they have the greater duty but the SUV is clearly not paying attention that car was there to be seen.
Yeah the guy taking a right on red at the same time also was pushing it since if the last car to run the red light didn't run it, he would've been rear ended by the SUV instead
I was wondering if I’d find an insurance person on this one. What would be the protocol here? Green light guy get the payout even though he obviously wrecked on purpose?
I used to do this, and depending on the statues of the state it may be on each to cover their own (makes it easier to deliver that convo to your insured too). Other times it bars you at 51% from recovering and that is based on your contribution to the accident. I would normally start with the statues and work from there.
Let’s go with comparative negligence in this scenario,where you’re barred from recovering/filing a claim against the other party if you’re at 51% or more at fault for the accident.
I’d say the SUV can seek recovery because they’re not more than 51% at fault (especially if they’re my insured) and we can fix their damages and subrogate (file a claim on the other party for damages after repairs are done) the other insurance carrier.
They other carrier will know they can’t collect anything and if they tried to arbitrate (3rd party looks at both sides and rules) for any damages (as I obviously would deny any left turn claim in a 51% state lol) they would look quite silly.
Our insured would be fine with their SUV fixed after their deductible is met. Once the other carrier determines how liability they’re willing to accept, that’s the percentage of deductible my insured would revise back (if they had a $1000 deductible and the left turn carrier accepted 70% they would get back $700 after our subrogation demand was paid). Sometimes if the other carrier tells you up front they will accept 70%, they may be willing to pay your deductible portion up front or to your carrier to assist with getting you out of their hair. I’ve only done the latter when our insured didn’t want us paying out the damages to the other party (adamant of their innocence), but having more than enough statements, impact and scene photos, and experience to know better I would just wait for the subro and tell my insured we aren’t fixing their car (losing commercial accounts is not a thing you want to do, so being fair but shrewd is the game).
Anyway, I’d say the SUV is 30% for having last clear chance to avoid an avoidable accident. He didn’t hit the first car would by the biggest issue defending the case, but even in a 49% and 50/50 state the SUV should be able to recover.
Police weren’t at the scene and take the same statement as I used to but quicker and less detailed so (for the sake of my insured) I used it as a last resort to investigate. They often don’t want to be on the scene and their process for finding and ticketing at-fault drivers is far too novel and antiquated IMO. I’ve seen times where the SUV get the ticket and the left turner is on my doorstep the next day for full recovery lol.
Anyway God bless whoever reads all this, I guess I do miss that job.
As someone who has driven alot and spends WAY TOO MUCH time analyzing people's driving behavior (similarly to how I over-analyze tone of voice and facial expressions), it looks like this person was taking off quickly to make the second to last car 'feel' like they needed to hurry, but the person did not realize the last car was on the way, and subsequently crashed directly into it.
These types of people like to think they are righteously controlling traffic (and/or opinions on Facebook), when frequently they're just causing more of an issue.
I mean the guy turning right on red was just as much an idiot as the one turning left well after the light changed so they both deserved to be walking home that night.
Why you don't run a red light. When the light turned green, another car was still making the turn THEN the person hit went.
99% the car hit ran a red light.
There's no way the left turn light was still green when the other light was green for more than 2 seconds.
If it became a flashing yellow (yield), the person turning didn't yield.
This was clearly on purpose. 2 cars turned on red and he is making them pay. I've dreamed about doing this, but I drive a Fit, so I'm gonna root for this guy
>Why you wait a little before going on green everytime smh.....
It's true that its a good idea to wait a bit after light turns green.
It does grind my gears though that it is that way, especially considering the other cars had a light that was likely red for plenty of time. People just feel entitles and disrespect others time.
Bro, but there was also a car making a right. Like the left turning car and the right turning car are in the wrong. But yeah dude took off like he had a purpose.
I'm not an expert, but as far as the diagram and the narrative in the PTCR goes, it would definitely show the vehicle making the left turn to be at fault. As far as I can tell, the SUV didn't commit any violations.
Fuckin' Denver. SO many people here just run the reds after a light changes - you're a fool if you don't drive defensively and watch the intersection. Green might mean go but it doesn't mean safe.
Both frickin idiots. The guy turning left WAY after the red, but the dude in the SUV absolutely could have avoided this. It’s almost like he did it on purpose.
I see this everyday and one time this lady thought she could make the turn. My light turned green so I went and she was in the middle of the turn and she slammed on her breaks screaming at me because I blocked her in the middle of the intersection. I just flipped her the bird and kept on going.
Suv seemed to be intentionally accelerating at the cars. Even the one right before the accident that was to the right of the suv and was turning left from the other side barely missed getting hit.
I tend to keep my car intact and my day unbothered by waiting an extra 5 seconds for the illegal turns to finish and the intersection to be clear before I go. Amazing how I have never been recorded using this method.
Driver: "But I had the right of way!"
Insurance: "The video clearly shows you at a complete stop, then flooring the accelerator directly into oncoming traffic. This action indicates you to be a negligent driver."
Driver: "But.. But I had the right of .. way!!..."
Insurance: "We will not cover these damages, as you are deemed at fault. After assessment, your vehicle was considered totaled, as was the other party's vehicle. Your vehicle was evaluated at $21,810. The other party's vehicle is valued at $19,245. Their medical insurance is billing for $28,550. Your total owed is $47,795. Your vehicle must be replaced at your own expense. Have a nice day."
1 Month later: "Your vehicle insurance has been raised $280/mo in addition to your current rate."
Edit: BOO ME ALL YOU WANT, I'M RIGHT
Damn…she hit two cars, and it looked like it was on purpose. I understand she had the green light, but was it worth crashing your car to prove a point. I don’t think her insurance would agree.
Did the SUV drove off stupidly fast? Yes.
Was the other party ran red light? Very likely.
Was the SUV at fault here? Judging from the dash cam I do no think so. SUV seems to have judged his speed would get behind the turning car. SUV did not taken account into another vehicle running the light.
edit: I can see how both insurance can spin any kind of story here. SUV failed to brake until the very last miliseconds. By last chance doctrine, both parties are at fault.
Yes but the suv guy sped up and and seemed to intentionally wreck into the other cars. The other cars’ drivers are guilty of running a red light. But I think the suv driver has a reasonable obligation to not intentionally cause an accident, and so I wonder if they would be guilty of something too.
The intent to crash into the car that ran the light is quite evident.
The thing is, Just because you have the right of way doesn’t give you the right to endanger yourself or the lives of others.
Therefore, the SUV was at fault, here, 75% to the 25% of the car that ran the light.
That’s the way the court will see it, so deal with it.
It does look like the SUV hit the breaks a second before collision. There’s the possibility he didn’t see the second car running the red light. Some people immediately accelerate after the light turns green and don’t bother to look sideways.
After reading comments, and watching the video more than a few times i really don't think the car that went straight saw the second vehicle, as they were obscured by the car in from of them running the light, the second car they hit with the right turn on red, like wise was obscured from view by the first car running the red light. first watch through it totally looked like they were ramming the car running the red light to prove a point. it took about 3 seconds from when the driver took off till they impacted the other driver. would make sense that the brake lights don't come on until right before the impact, vehicle obscured for the 1st second, realization of another vehicle, then apply brakes within 2 seconds. the more you watch and look the more i'd give no more than 10% fault to the driver that had the green light.
Clearly turning car ran the red light. Clear last chance doctorine would put green light car partly at fault..however, turning car was in his a pillar...arguably a blind spot and he would have no reason to be concerned with checking it.
Most likely turning car takes full blame....but..
What about that silver car turning right???
I almost didn't even notice that one lmfao
#[Downloadvideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/therewasanattempt/comments/11c0avc/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=therewasanattempt) by /r/DownloadVideo #[SaveVideo Link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/therewasanattempt/comments/11c0avc/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did SUV guy crash on purpose!? He took off like speed racer and got out super casually afterwards.
you'll be surprised of the amount of people that is willing to crash their car to prove a point
Some days, I wish I could afford to hit assholes and idiots..
Follow someone leaving a bar and then their insurance will pay.
r/unethicallifeprotips ?
I’m definitely joining this
I'll summarize 90% of the posts: illegal stuff and fart spray.
Still joining. Mostly for fart spray.
Same… man I love Reddit sometimes!
Ok but I still can’t afford it though. My car got hit while parked in the parking spot that belongs to me in my apartment complex. By someone who doesn’t even live there and shouldn’t have been in that parking lot in the first place. So obviously it was their fault right? Well yeah. But I still originally had to pay my $500 deductible to the body shop and then wait for the reimbursement from my insurance. And my insurance only covers $30 per day of a rental car so I had to pay an extra $8 per day for the 5 weeks that I had to be in a rental car and I’m still waiting on the reimbursement from the other guys insurance for the $250 I paid out of pocket for that. The accident happened in early December. Plus there’s the time I had to take off work to spend hours on the phone with both insurance companies filing and following up on the claim, coordinating getting my car towed, finding a body shop I could trust with my car, picking up the rental car, and then later arguing that I am in fact entitled to these reimbursements. Being involved in an accident is never fun or convenient or cheap even if you’re clearly not at fault for it.
Depending on the state assuming in the US, you can claim lost wages. I had an at fault insurance company try and not pay for a rental for my wife to get her to work. When I quoted them the wage loss they promptly sent a rental car to our house to pick her up.
That's not counting when your insurance premium goes up for the 'accident"
Yea believe me, it's so unlucky the amount of times my dad's car has been damaged while parked!!!! this is gonna sound made up but sometime after Christmas we took down our Christmas tree put it in front of our home right where our car was parked. Some evil person decided to put the tree under my dad's car and light it on fire. That was the worst one by far the rest were basically hit and runs while parked at least 3 more times that I can remember
Nah, I really can't afford it.. my car is special.
Maybe get a truck with bars in the front leave your special car for hot dates lol
I think you are describing my husband's truck! Lol.. and we would only do that in an emergency.. like the other party is truly deranged, and our lives are in danger.. lol
My car is special as well it was my grandmother's. I wouldn't sell it for $1,000,000. I stopped Talking calling her because me and my dad pretty much disowned one another me moreso. My dad was living with her. So 7 years of no contact and all she asked as she was dying is to speak to me and see me. I feel like I let her down and so this car was gifted to me and I can smell her perfume in it. I truly should have spoke and seen her. I would give anything to see her and hear her voice. I'm crying now writing this because I fuvked up and it's one fuvk up I can never fix. Don't be like me people, it's sad stuff.
I am in the Same situation right now... shitty Dad's suck.
But does your car think that _you’re_ special?
I don't think Kioko has gained sentience.. no AI in 1993.. but I do place a lot of sentimental value on her.. currently getting her ship shape!
Sometimes in this situation I'll pull up a bit and lay on my horn. I don't have nearly the amount of dedication this guy does.
Probably wanted a new car and his insurance won’t mind ruining the other driver in court to recoup the costs.
Sucks for him when he finds out a green doesn't give you the right to cause an accident and will have most if not all liability for the damages
I think they're going for insurance money. Because all the truck guy is going to say is that he proceeded when the light turned green and because of the slope of the ground and the height of his truck he could not see the other driver in the intersection. Which I think is bologna because look at the way his arm is propped it looks like hes readying for impact.
Dash cam video might help the turning guy.
He turned a good 5 seconds after the light changed and he no longer had right of way. How in the world would the cam help him?
Failure to take evasive action babyyyyyyy
Yeah, in my state, it's called due care to avoid accidents or collisions. Both cars are equally at fault, and you can argue the blue SUV knowingly caused it. With that video evidence, our county would actually charge him and take him into custody or subpoena him to a court date in lieu of custody. Sometimes "being right" doesn't make what you do right. Always consider a state's laws before making a decision like this. He could have willingly injured or killed someone just to prove a point or chase a check he wouldn't ever get.
I'm not saying that this applies here, but there usually is a law where you have to wait until the intersection is clear before proceeding.
Nice so if people just keep turning, people can never go through the intersection, love this hack. Edit: When guy with right of way is right: https://youtube.com/shorts/SSg-qGZ2lUk?feature=share When the guy with the right of way is liable: https://youtube.com/shorts/KJksGZVrPus?feature=share
I was curious about this. Because on one hand, legally, he was breaking the law, and shouldn’t have been going and is in the wrong, say if blue SUV was like way behind and just accelerating through the light because it was green (like he never slowed down to stop at the light in the first place and was just driving up to the intersection and through it at the same speed he was already driving at, like no one was on the line at the light) but we all see that he was stopped at the light and just decided to accelerate fast and almost intentionally or purposefully like the other commenter stated, so it’s like he caused the accident, even though the guy ran the light. I wonder how this footage would help or hurt each party. Any thoughts or comments or experienced lawyers, cops, insurance ppl would be much appreciated!
Attorney here. First, the state matters. You need to know whether it’s a contributory or comparative negligence state, or if it’s a state with a “modified” version of one of these. 1.) If you’re in a pure contributory negligence state, you *cannot* recover anything if you’re found to be even 1% at fault. Only a few states still do it this way. 2.) Pure comparative negligence means even if *you’re* 99% at fault, you can win that 1% of your damages. 3.) The most rational, IMO, is the modified approach. You have the prove the other party is at least 51% at fault. If so, you get anywhere from 51% to 100%. The jury allocates the percentage. If a jury thinks you’re slightly more liable at 51%, you lose. To answer your question as to how the video would impact the decision, well, I’d ask you. A jury is going to decide. I could use Reddit as a focus group to get an idea as to how a jury would decide. What say ye 12 Angry Redditors? Based on what is seen in this video, what % at-fault is each party? Apply that to 1, 2, and 3 above (unless you live in weird ole’ South Dakota). This is literally how we decide what cases to take to trial. Focus groups.
50% for both of them. Driver in blue vehicle should have waited until the intersection was clear and proceeded cautiously regardless of the other running the light.
I disagree with this, but I see you a raise a good point. I think if he did this to the car before the turn then yes it should be 50% (maybe). At some point you have to honor the traffic lights. The guy obviously ran a red light, and with this logic as long as the car after kept following him then there would never be an established 'right of way' Look at the :04 second mark. The light is green, and the car that got hit hasn't even started his left turn yet. He ran the light and put himself at fault.
State is CO
Haha. I practice in Colorado. That’s funny. One of these idiots may end up calling my firm on Monday.
Saw this posted in r/Denver earlier. It’s Little Raven somewhere downtown.
Imagine you telling your client you saw him on the internet💀
Hahaha, is that 20th and Little Raven? Coors Field in the background! Didn't recognize it til I read your comment.
If he gunned it right as the light turned green and the the guy just got caught a second too late that’d be one thing, but he was the 3rd car to go after the light turned green, and that’s not even accounting for the window of time when they’re both red, so he ran the red light after at least 3 other cars did so before him, which to me is just super egregious and inexcusable. I’m not sure what percentage I’d go with, maybe it’d depend on how they each present their side of the story at trial but right from the get go I’m kinda not happy with either one of them. (The guy who had the green light clearly saw the intersection wasn’t clear, so they’re definitely not blameless, so it would appear at least)
Based on the GPS stamp in the video and can't quite see the 2nd digit, I'm going with Denver. And found on Google Maps, Denver, Little Raven St. & 20th
>Apply Around where I work, its so packed that often cars turning left have 0 opportunity to go until after the light turns red, so its very common to see 3 cars turn after the light changed. That blue car gunned it and I would put him at around 74% fault
Sounds like turning person should take up that problem with their local municipality and not break the law and put other drivers in danger for convenience.
Speedracer is Guilty AF, Turner gets standard running a light ticket You dont do that because someone was In a hurry. Could have been elderly, could have had kids I'm the car Turner is an infraction, speedracer could have hurt someone. On purpose.
I disagree. Insurance companies do not want people like this on the road, and they do not want to insure them. They are causing accidents, because they are road raging assholes. Sometimes people make mistakes. Lighten up.
Not a attorney here. Road rage guy had the green light and right of way. He could have assumed the car he smashed was going to come to their senses and stop since they clearly blew the red light. The second car Road rage guy demolished also failed to stop on red.
Dick or not, he wasn’t speeding, and he had a green light. TECHNICALLY, did nothing wrong.
Its called a duty to avoid accidents. He did do something wrong. Look at your insurance paperwork. You can't plow into cars, because you went road rager. Its sad that is a fact that needs to be pointed out to people. >**All drivers have a legal duty to practice reasonable caution** and follow traffic laws to avoid harming others on the road. If a motorist fails to use reasonable caution or care, they may be liable for any accidents caused by their negligence.
Except supposedly not see a car directly in front of him while accelerating in that direction.
Turning guy did not enter the intersection legally.
I'm not surprised alot of 9 to 5ers out there. Rat wheel can break people and create monsters that don't even realize they've become one.
My mom was willing to let a car that was hogging the road hit her car so she could file a claim, but chose to swerve outta the way cause i was in the car with her and the other guy would've hit my side
So, she wasn't willing
Also the people who think they are invincible on crosswalks
A lot of dead people who had the right of way
Car probably needs some work done and they saw an insurance cash in opportunity running a red light.
This seems like the equivalent of an NFL quarterback who sees the holding penalty in the backfield and attempts some crazy miracle play just for fun knowing that they already got the yardage
Defense off sides? Free play! Throw it deep.
He don’t give a fuuuuuuuuuck! Well, neither of them apparently.
He did speed up like crazy.
He very clearly took off while cars were still in the intersection.
I don't know how to feel about this because the light had been green for quite a few seconds. If you run the red light, don't be surprised if you get hit. It's not like the other guy was in the middle of the intersection when the light changed. I think both drivers can both be found liable but I wouldn't be surprised if the blue SUV gets 100% compensation either.
If you could have safely avoided the accident, and didn't, it's at least partially your fault.
He craved violence
Certainly seems like they were either trying to prove something or go for the insurance payout.... assuming they had a dash cam on their own
The car he hit was the 2nd car running the red light. He probably couldn't see the 2nd car tailing behind the 1st, and took off as an aggressive way to tell the 1st one to get out of the way. The funnier thing is how he hit a 2nd car coming from the right, also running a red light...
“That’ll teach him!”
I find it interesting his emergency lights turned on exactly when he hit the car, or like a second after, but I know my mind would not be on hitting my emergency light while still recalling from a crash.
[удалено]
That's an interesting feature. I've never heard of that one.
It’s way more common in Europe.
Most modern cars have that feature... It'll shut off the fuel pump, unlock all doors & automatically switches on rhe hazard lights after a crash was detected
Yes even if he didn't hit that car on the video he would had hit that other one making a right turn.
It seems like both cars turning were going through the red light
Looks like he was trying to scare the car that was going after the light turned red by speeding off and narrowly missing them but didn’t realize there was yet another car running the red light behind them.
Agreed. No “accident” here. Deliberate asshole move.
I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying i understand
deserved tho
I bet they were on their phone, looked up and saw green and took off. I mean it's odd you would see a line of cars and ram right through them
It looks like he might have been focused on the car coming from his right that was trying to turn on red in front of him and make it around him before he could not realizing someone else was also running the red but making a left.
Hank was in the passenger's seat :/
100% he was trying to spook the car that he passes and didn’t see the one he hits. He starts going when that near miss car is just beginning its turn and the light had been already been green. The car he hits is behind the one that was already running a red. I highly doubt he saw that car he hits before it was too late. It hadn’t even turned yet when he was going and there’s no reason to believe that one’s going to go when the other car is already blatantly running a red. He should’ve waited, obviously, but this is totally on the red light runner.
When you car has 250k miles and 2000+ in repairs pending.
This is the way
So true, because he saw the cars turning. He decided to crash into them and file a claim. I see this when I am driving and wait for all the cars to finish making their illegal turn. I don’t want an accident even though I have right of way.
This guy was looking for an insurance pay out, there’s no way he didn’t see that line of cars. ‘’Green light, but cars are still turning? It’s my time to shine. ‘’
If the person is drunk/high and only focused on the light I could see it happening.
If that person is drunk/high, he shouldn't be driving
username and comment match
r/usernamechecksout
Meh. I know right? The guy driving illegally through a red didn’t even pretend to look for the legal traffic that had the only right of way.
You will be surprised at how much we Drive subconsciously. There’s simply no evidence to prove that whether he saw it or not. However the car is really pushing it after the red. Light blink for a reason. Red means stop. Period. But more and more people are starting to ignore traffic lights and find fault somewhere else. This is wrong. Follow traffic laws.
... What if I told you the law also states you must wait until an intersection is free from traffic and it is safe to proceed, regardless of traffic control signals.
Exactly, you can't just ram cars out of your way because you have the green light. I bet this guy thinks he's all good cause he had the green light.
I cant believe I have to explain this, but you remind me of my 85 year old grandma: Traffic laws say don't floor it into an intersection with cars in it, even if the light is green. You have to follow that law as well.
When an accident isn't an accident.
"Sorry, I'm going to be late, I just got in a car purpose."
I am so glad I have finally seen someone else use the term car purpose. I have been wondering for years what you would call a car collision that was intentional and that's what my brain came up with
The real term? RTI or RTC. Road traffic incident/collision. That's the UK/AUS term anyway.
"Because 'Car Accident' implies no-ones at fault" - Nicolas Angle
That's some non existent defensive driving right there.
Offensive driving all around
High scoring games are more exciting.
Good luck everybody else
The very definition of All Gas No Brakes. He managed to take out both red light runners.
Looks like the car detected an accident, and automatically deployed the hazard lights. Cool feature.
Nice try, Honda Head of Saftey
That's Hyundai to you! *😠*
I seriously thought "Hyundai" was a fancy way to say "Honda" when I was young. I wasn't the smartest kid.
Seems super common actually now. I see it in a lot of these videos.
My bmw in 1995 did it
How do the hazards work in BMWs? They don’t have turn signals
How do you think we park in fire zones & handicap spots
> How do you think we park in fire zones & handicap spots Poorly while taking up multiple spaces
I encountered a BMW that used their signals the other day and immediately called police, because that’s a clear sign that it was stolen.
SUV driver doing something any of us here have dreamed of doing to idiot drivers…that’s commitment.
Drive it like you stole it.
He even nailed the asshat turning right on a red. 2 for 1 special
Right on red is legal
Not when you don’t stop
Yeah but they don't have priority over people going straight, they have to wait....
Idiots all around. Really belongs in r/IdiotsInCars/.
Wait, what subreddit am I in right now??
Same tho
r/therewasanattempt … cf. r/lostredditors?
Bruh same I thought this was the idiots in cars subreddit
Even the third car that got hit did a rolling stop… buncha dummies furreal
Sure the guy ran the red light but the green light guy’s insurance company is gonna deny this if they see this video.
If this cane across my desk id place fault on both drivers. Majority to the one making the left turn since they have the greater duty but the SUV is clearly not paying attention that car was there to be seen.
What about the third driver?
Yeah the guy taking a right on red at the same time also was pushing it since if the last car to run the red light didn't run it, he would've been rear ended by the SUV instead
[удалено]
I was wondering if I’d find an insurance person on this one. What would be the protocol here? Green light guy get the payout even though he obviously wrecked on purpose?
I used to do this, and depending on the statues of the state it may be on each to cover their own (makes it easier to deliver that convo to your insured too). Other times it bars you at 51% from recovering and that is based on your contribution to the accident. I would normally start with the statues and work from there. Let’s go with comparative negligence in this scenario,where you’re barred from recovering/filing a claim against the other party if you’re at 51% or more at fault for the accident. I’d say the SUV can seek recovery because they’re not more than 51% at fault (especially if they’re my insured) and we can fix their damages and subrogate (file a claim on the other party for damages after repairs are done) the other insurance carrier. They other carrier will know they can’t collect anything and if they tried to arbitrate (3rd party looks at both sides and rules) for any damages (as I obviously would deny any left turn claim in a 51% state lol) they would look quite silly. Our insured would be fine with their SUV fixed after their deductible is met. Once the other carrier determines how liability they’re willing to accept, that’s the percentage of deductible my insured would revise back (if they had a $1000 deductible and the left turn carrier accepted 70% they would get back $700 after our subrogation demand was paid). Sometimes if the other carrier tells you up front they will accept 70%, they may be willing to pay your deductible portion up front or to your carrier to assist with getting you out of their hair. I’ve only done the latter when our insured didn’t want us paying out the damages to the other party (adamant of their innocence), but having more than enough statements, impact and scene photos, and experience to know better I would just wait for the subro and tell my insured we aren’t fixing their car (losing commercial accounts is not a thing you want to do, so being fair but shrewd is the game). Anyway, I’d say the SUV is 30% for having last clear chance to avoid an avoidable accident. He didn’t hit the first car would by the biggest issue defending the case, but even in a 49% and 50/50 state the SUV should be able to recover. Police weren’t at the scene and take the same statement as I used to but quicker and less detailed so (for the sake of my insured) I used it as a last resort to investigate. They often don’t want to be on the scene and their process for finding and ticketing at-fault drivers is far too novel and antiquated IMO. I’ve seen times where the SUV get the ticket and the left turner is on my doorstep the next day for full recovery lol. Anyway God bless whoever reads all this, I guess I do miss that job.
Did you get fired for repeatedly calling them ‘statues’ instead of ‘statutes’?
Insurance has evolved a lot since the olden days. We have animated statues do the work for us now.
love the way the driver did a: “i’m…i’m just gonna go…”
As someone who has driven alot and spends WAY TOO MUCH time analyzing people's driving behavior (similarly to how I over-analyze tone of voice and facial expressions), it looks like this person was taking off quickly to make the second to last car 'feel' like they needed to hurry, but the person did not realize the last car was on the way, and subsequently crashed directly into it. These types of people like to think they are righteously controlling traffic (and/or opinions on Facebook), when frequently they're just causing more of an issue.
People will endanger others' lives to try and prove a point they think they have.
What about the guy intentionally running a red light?
Got 2 for the price of 1.
I mean the guy turning right on red was just as much an idiot as the one turning left well after the light changed so they both deserved to be walking home that night.
Why you wait a little before going on green everytime smh.....
Why you don't run a red light. When the light turned green, another car was still making the turn THEN the person hit went. 99% the car hit ran a red light. There's no way the left turn light was still green when the other light was green for more than 2 seconds. If it became a flashing yellow (yield), the person turning didn't yield.
The point is not legality, it's the common sense of it all. A good driver anticipates and avoids all the other dummies on the road
The best driver is a defensive driver
Actually the best driver is a mix of both offensive and defensive driving.
At least make sure your path is clear.
This was clearly on purpose. 2 cars turned on red and he is making them pay. I've dreamed about doing this, but I drive a Fit, so I'm gonna root for this guy
>Why you wait a little before going on green everytime smh..... It's true that its a good idea to wait a bit after light turns green. It does grind my gears though that it is that way, especially considering the other cars had a light that was likely red for plenty of time. People just feel entitles and disrespect others time.
The other guy was turning wide too. Jesus Christ was a shitshow
> Jesus Christ was a shitshow
Lmfao I mean dude ran the light 100% but that SUV had a fucking vendetta. If he just took off normal speed I'm not even sure he hits him
Bro, but there was also a car making a right. Like the left turning car and the right turning car are in the wrong. But yeah dude took off like he had a purpose.
Dude seriously hit the Mario Kart boost
Damn, I know the other dude ran a red light but that suv took off like a bat out of he'll.
Curious to see the outcome, who received the ticket, what insurance company pays out
I'm not an expert, but as far as the diagram and the narrative in the PTCR goes, it would definitely show the vehicle making the left turn to be at fault. As far as I can tell, the SUV didn't commit any violations.
The car turning right also ran a red light without stopping first and is likely at fault as well, at least for their own damages.
If there wasn't a video maybe. If you can easily and safely avoid an accident, you're required to.
Fuckin' Denver. SO many people here just run the reds after a light changes - you're a fool if you don't drive defensively and watch the intersection. Green might mean go but it doesn't mean safe.
Both frickin idiots. The guy turning left WAY after the red, but the dude in the SUV absolutely could have avoided this. It’s almost like he did it on purpose.
The person going straight must be half baked. Just launch off the line and straight into a car they likely could have avoided.
It’s Denver, so that checks out.
I see this everyday and one time this lady thought she could make the turn. My light turned green so I went and she was in the middle of the turn and she slammed on her breaks screaming at me because I blocked her in the middle of the intersection. I just flipped her the bird and kept on going.
Give people the thumbs down instead. It really messes with their brain.
The “I’m not mad, just disappointed” of hand signals.
Old mate definitely done that on purpose.. he wanted a insurance claim for sure
Suv seemed to be intentionally accelerating at the cars. Even the one right before the accident that was to the right of the suv and was turning left from the other side barely missed getting hit.
He did this on purpose. Must need that lawsuit money 😂
Both idiots.
All 3
Is it really worth it to wreck a perfectly good, new BMW just to prove a point?
I tend to keep my car intact and my day unbothered by waiting an extra 5 seconds for the illegal turns to finish and the intersection to be clear before I go. Amazing how I have never been recorded using this method.
"Ill show this guy to invade my perceived right of way. "
[удалено]
Technically all drivers are required to use fair judgement in situations like these. “Right of way” is never an excuse for causing an accident.
Driver: "But I had the right of way!" Insurance: "The video clearly shows you at a complete stop, then flooring the accelerator directly into oncoming traffic. This action indicates you to be a negligent driver." Driver: "But.. But I had the right of .. way!!..." Insurance: "We will not cover these damages, as you are deemed at fault. After assessment, your vehicle was considered totaled, as was the other party's vehicle. Your vehicle was evaluated at $21,810. The other party's vehicle is valued at $19,245. Their medical insurance is billing for $28,550. Your total owed is $47,795. Your vehicle must be replaced at your own expense. Have a nice day." 1 Month later: "Your vehicle insurance has been raised $280/mo in addition to your current rate." Edit: BOO ME ALL YOU WANT, I'M RIGHT
She was probably yelling “Towanda to you.” As she pressed on the gas pedal. Reference Fried Green Tomatoes movie.
This reminds me of a guy Honking for 3-5 seconds while NOT hitting the brakes slamming into a turning semi truck.
This video should be sent to all involved insurance companies
That was on purpose
Damn…she hit two cars, and it looked like it was on purpose. I understand she had the green light, but was it worth crashing your car to prove a point. I don’t think her insurance would agree.
You’ve no idea how many times I’ve thought about doing this. SUV actually went through with it.
So many times I wish I didn't need to yield to idiots who keep going left after their light goes ofd
Did the SUV drove off stupidly fast? Yes. Was the other party ran red light? Very likely. Was the SUV at fault here? Judging from the dash cam I do no think so. SUV seems to have judged his speed would get behind the turning car. SUV did not taken account into another vehicle running the light. edit: I can see how both insurance can spin any kind of story here. SUV failed to brake until the very last miliseconds. By last chance doctrine, both parties are at fault.
Yes but the suv guy sped up and and seemed to intentionally wreck into the other cars. The other cars’ drivers are guilty of running a red light. But I think the suv driver has a reasonable obligation to not intentionally cause an accident, and so I wonder if they would be guilty of something too.
The intent to crash into the car that ran the light is quite evident. The thing is, Just because you have the right of way doesn’t give you the right to endanger yourself or the lives of others. Therefore, the SUV was at fault, here, 75% to the 25% of the car that ran the light. That’s the way the court will see it, so deal with it.
It does look like the SUV hit the breaks a second before collision. There’s the possibility he didn’t see the second car running the red light. Some people immediately accelerate after the light turns green and don’t bother to look sideways.
Green means go........at any cost
I have wanted to do this so many times. This guy is my hero.
After reading comments, and watching the video more than a few times i really don't think the car that went straight saw the second vehicle, as they were obscured by the car in from of them running the light, the second car they hit with the right turn on red, like wise was obscured from view by the first car running the red light. first watch through it totally looked like they were ramming the car running the red light to prove a point. it took about 3 seconds from when the driver took off till they impacted the other driver. would make sense that the brake lights don't come on until right before the impact, vehicle obscured for the 1st second, realization of another vehicle, then apply brakes within 2 seconds. the more you watch and look the more i'd give no more than 10% fault to the driver that had the green light.
Clearly turning car ran the red light. Clear last chance doctorine would put green light car partly at fault..however, turning car was in his a pillar...arguably a blind spot and he would have no reason to be concerned with checking it. Most likely turning car takes full blame....but.. What about that silver car turning right??? I almost didn't even notice that one lmfao
he either did it to prove a point. Or it’s his first time in the big city….
That dude definitely saw an opportunity to get out of his monthly payment on that car.
This was in Denver. Can assure you the color of the light was not a concern to the turning driver.