Who is a fault? Advanced light runners after the advance has ended

[pusher69]

Both cars turning are at fault.
SUV had green light and the right of way.

From a traffic ticket, yes.
From the insurance's point of view, the SUV should have waited until the intersection was cleared before proceeding.

Insurance companies will find any excuse to not pay out the claim and/or raise rates after you are involved in a traffic accident.

This is why I always pause after a red light goes green... just to see if there are any red light runners or the late lefties.

 

[Jenesis]

From a traffic ticket, yes.
From the insurance's point of view, the SUV should have waited until the intersection was cleared before proceeding.

Insurance companies will find any excuse to not pay out the claim and/or raise rates after you are involved in a traffic accident.

This is why I always pause after a red light goes green... just to see if there are any red light runners or the late lefties.

But how can an insurance company say anything when the car driver gets the ticket and we have no fault insurance????

I never understood that.

 

[Ginomore]

From a traffic ticket, yes.
From the insurance's point of view, the SUV should have waited until the intersection was cleared before proceeding.

Insurance companies will find any excuse to not pay out the claim and/or raise rates after you are involved in a traffic accident.

This is why I always pause after a red light goes green... just to see if there are any red light runners or the late lefties.

We are not sure if the suv was stopped at the light or cruising through the intersection.
There may not have been enough time to stop.

 

[massman]

We are not sure if the suv was stopped at the light or cruising through the intersection.
There may not have been enough time to stop.

SUV appeared to accelerate.

 

[shack]

Which was the car that got it. He was not in the intersection before the SUV. It was like a millisecond but the SUV was in the intersection first.

I don't believe we actually see the lines on the road on the SUV's side so we don't know exactly when he ended. As, he knew very well that there were a string of cars making that left turn. He cannot make an assumption was to which car would be the last. He has to ENSURE that the way was clear, not assume.

It seems you think that because other cars were in the intersection, the SUV should not have been in the intersection period.

Pretty much. That's what ensuring that the way is clear means.

But when you are driving and not stopped at the light and you see a green light with advanced cars going though, you would suspect that the line of cars would finish by the time you reach the intersection.

Suspecting is not assuring. He could have gently hit the brakes and slowed down a bit to ensure it was clear. Even though we don't see exactly when he entered the intersection, we do clearly see that his brake lights did not turn on prior to the actual collision.

Also, if he was driving and not stopped then maybe the cars that were stop, blocked his vision of the car.

Possibly. But I believe that they were to his right, so I don't think that was the case.

I don't want to argue because both of us are agreeing that the car making the left turn was the bigger douchebag. But depending on the wording of the law and who entered the intersection first, the SUV may not be totally absolved of blame.

 

[Adamxx]

Hi another way of looking at it is, who is “wrong” if death was involved, and the one who did not survive, had a young family.

 

[massman]

Watched it again, with sound up, while the left turn light runner was wrong, the SUV clearly (aggressively) accelerated into the other vehicle without braking until after the collision and either did so intentionally (ie is a fucking psycho) or was not looking at the road at all (likely looking at phone). That is not a normal response to the road situation at all. Having right of way does not entitle you to intentionally drive into another vehicle.

 

[IM469]

Hi another way of looking at it is, who is “wrong” if death was involved, and the one who did not survive, had a young family.

If you are wrong, the consequences change nothing. They are the result of asshole behaviour.

I got a hunch just who would be tempted to run the light and take the risk from responses so far.

 

[eddie kerr]

Although the car "turning & running the intersection" after the advanced light is gone is technically at fault - be honest we all do it - but the SUV in fact speeds up going thru the light. The greater fault (although both are at fault) is the SUV driver because he/she should have slowed down to let the car make the turn even if though the advanced light is gone.

LTO_3

You are totally wrong, if a vehicle is turning left after the advance green,he must Yield problem is younger drivers (40 and under) don't know the meaning of the word Yield.

 

[eddie kerr]

Watched it again, with sound up, while the left turn light runner was wrong, the SUV clearly (aggressively) accelerated into the other vehicle without braking until after the collision and either did so intentionally (ie is a fucking psycho) or was not looking at the road at all (likely looking at phone). That is not a normal response to the road situation at all. Having right of way does not entitle you to intentionally drive into another vehicle.

The bottom line is the vehicle ,along the turn is at fault.

 

[Adamxx]

If you are wrong, the consequences change nothing. They are the result of asshole behaviour.

I got a hunch just who would be tempted to run the light and take the risk from responses so far.

In my opinion, every action and or decision has consequences and or risks, and decisions should be made based on ones priorities and associated potential consequences.

“Wrong” was in quotes as at the end of the day if my decision places my family especially young children, and myself at risk more than another, then I am “wrong” for making it.

What the Law, government or society recommends may not be the wise decision in certain situations. Example, when my children started to drive, I often told them , that because a truck driver is not following the rules on the road and the truck is breaking a light, if you continue driving and you get killed, because you think they are wrong, is it a good or wrong decision. They always replied ir would be the wrong decision.

However, to each their own.

 

[pusher69]

But how can an insurance company say anything when the car driver gets the ticket and we have no fault insurance????

I never understood that.

No fault insurance just means that you deal with your insurance for the claim to fix/replace your damaged vehicle. It used to be with At-Fault, that you would deal with the other person's insurance and the process could drag on for a bit long.

The insurance companies will keep a track record of fault percentage on your history to determine how much of a rate increase when its time for renewals.
They have a calculated risk measurement, that determines the likelihood of your potential to be involved in a future car accident, based on your driving patterns/behaviour.

In this case, Green light SUV wouldn't get a traffic ticket, but from the insurance's perspective, they should have slowed down and only enter the intersection once its cleared.

 

[pusher69]

We are not sure if the suv was stopped at the light or cruising through the intersection.
There may not have been enough time to stop.

Based on what I saw, the SUV was not going fast enough to be cruising through the intersection. I started accelerating and likely panic and hit the accelerator instead of the brakes after realizing they were going to hit the car turning left (you can see a sudden burst of acceleration just be the hit).
The new vehicles now have an onboard computer that will track the car's movements leading up to a collision (similar to a plane's black box) and it can record if the driver accelerated or not.

 

[thumper18474]

You are totally wrong, if a vehicle is turning left after the advance green,he must Yield problem is younger drivers (40 and under) don't know the meaning of the word Yield.

^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^

 

[richaceg]

Guy turning left run a red light....guy going on green light always have the right of way...

 

[LTO_3]

You are totally wrong, if a vehicle is turning left after the advance green,he must Yield problem is younger drivers (40 and under) don't know the meaning of the word Yield.

We'll agree to disagree.

LTO_3

 

[Jenesis]

No fault insurance just means that you deal with your insurance for the claim to fix/replace your damaged vehicle. It used to be with At-Fault, that you would deal with the other person's insurance and the process could drag on for a bit long.

The insurance companies will keep a track record of fault percentage on your history to determine how much of a rate increase when its time for renewals.
They have a calculated risk measurement, that determines the likelihood of your potential to be involved in a future car accident, based on your driving patterns/behaviour.

In this case, Green light SUV wouldn't get a traffic ticket, but from the insurance's perspective, they should have slowed down and only enter the intersection once its cleared.

Thank you. That cleared it right up.

 

[kid_kuh]

damn I didn't read the question wrong and choose an answer different than what I thought. Once the advance is finished and the holding traffic gets a green light, the turning traffic has to wait until it's safe to continue. However, you can be partially be at fault for aggressive (dangerous) driving depending if you intentionally caused the accident. Based on the video I believe both could be charged. These are all my opinions, I'm not an expert on this subject. Please consult a lawyer for concrete answers.