Who would be at fault?

If that’s the case that the front vehicle made the sudden stop due to an animal crossing, there’s got to be proof of it for the insurance company of it. Proof with photos or videos of the dead animal and of the scene of the accident. Or if the animal ran off, then photos of the blood in the front bumper, although on this one I’m not too sure the insurance company will accep that. Insurance companies are not dumb, they know when someone is making a false statement.

If there’s no proof, whomever hits another vehicle in the rear is at fault.

Got hit by rear end of car once, back of Ford E250 van bumper. Lady on cell phone backing out of parking space- got out and said something like 'got to go mom, I just hit someone, didn't see while backing, whats our insurance company. was over thousand damage to her car, left rear fender, most of bumper, some tail lights. maybe a $2.95 can of paint for old heavy Ford. Couple warnings when driving cab - watch out at red lights, some cars in front will reverse into you and say they'll take payoff now- or call police and have your cab license pulled. Yellow dispatcher said call in and have police report called for also- fraud gang in area and Auto theft detail had some questions to ask the *** enders. A few cases of people just learning to drive manual trannies or some of newer paddle shifters have backed into cars at intersection after stopping, go to neutral and then shift into revers when starting again, been held at fault - inattentive driving charge with no criminal intent. .

You've heard of situations where the car in front was held responsible for a rear-end collision, but actually no you haven't. A rear-end collision is always the fault of whoever did the rear-ending, no exceptions allowed and no excuses accepted.

There are lots of people who say they were rear-ended and it was technically their fault, but those people all leave crucial details out of their side of the story. They're not outright lying when they do that, they're just human. Most people don't like to admit that they caused an accident, and nobody at all likes to admit that they're a bad driver. Lemmy show you two very common I-was-rear-ended stories that I've heard a thousand times. This is how the statements always go...

THE STORY: I was cruising along on the freeway, and up front I saw a line of slow vehicles that I had to pass. I put my signal on for 20 seconds, checked my mirrors and blind spot, checked my mirrors again, and changed lanes. I was almost 99.9% totally fully in my lane, and the other guy came fa-LY-ing (they literally say it like that) up out of nowhere and rear-ended my vehicle. So I was hit from behind, right? Seriously, that guy was going way too fast for safety. So it's the other idiot's fault, right?

THE REALITY: It wasn't a rear-end collision, it was a lane change collision. The damage in on the back corner of the vehicle, not dead center.

THE OTHER STORY: I was parked at the supermarket and had just loaded 20 bags of stuff into my trunk. I got in the car, started the engine, and backed out of my parking space. No wait... I looked left and right, checked my mirrors and blind spots, then I got out and put out flares and big warning signs with flashing lights, looked left and right again, then slowly backed out of my parking spot. I was almost like 99.9% out of the space, in fact I was fully stopped and was in the process of shifting to a forward gear, and this other car came fa-LY-ing out of nowhere, way too fast for public safety, and rear-ended my vehicle. Seriously, you should have that guy tested for drugs or something, because nobody should ever be driving that fast and he was probably texting while driving because I was totally almost stopped when he hit me. So it's definitely his fault, right? Because I was definitely already almost stopped, right?

THE REALITY: Backing into a vehicle is not the same as being rear-ended.

If you were able to stop for the deer, the car behind you should not be following you so closely they can't stop and they are at fault when they hit you. Pay attention further ahead that just the car in front of you if you can. This is not so easy when behind a larger vehicle with its windows blacked out and that kind of tint should be outlawed if for no other reason than that. You can back off following when your forward view is thus obscured.

When you rear end someone, you will always be found at fault for the following reasons:

-following too closely

-not paying attention

-not keeping an assured distance

People stop all the time, be it for an animal, a pedestrian, or something that could be on the road, thus you must be aware of this and be prepared in case someone suddenly stops. Another common scenario is when someone stops, then starts to go forward again and realizes to pull out onto a street or to make a turn is not safe, thus stops again.

In a rear end collision the guy doing the rear ending is ALWAYS responsible.

It is not a mystery at all. 99.9% of the time when anyone rear ends another vehicle for any reason, the person who rear ended will be found liable by the involved insurance companies

99% of the time it is the following vehicle who is at fault because of following too close for the speed being driven.

Almost in all cases the driver who smacks into the car in front of him is at fault,

In your example, the guy behind is at fault, he didn't have the proper safe distance or he wasn't paying attention, whatever, he is at fault.

About the only time the front driver would be a fault is when he is entering traffic or turning right or left in an intersection, he has to stop and yield to oncoming traffic before he can enter and if he doesn't and as a result the other car smacks into him, it will be his fault

The thought is that you should not be following so close to the other car that you do not have time to stop, so you who rear end are at fault. Many places have no-fault insurance however.