[nairrk]

As everyone gave thier opinions, you cannot do anything with the cars in front.
The fellow who hit you from behind is responsible for the damage.
Hope you have the car number and the owner name/phone number and you can claim from the insurance for the repairs?

[smooth]

Sorry to hear about your incident superselect.
Once I was crossing the Delhi Cantt intersection in Delhi, 1 vehicle from the other side just jumped the light and due to that the Alto in front of me have to apply sudden brakes, I was behind this Alto and there is a maruti 800 behind me. I also applied the hard brakes to avoid the collision but the car behind me rammed into me and due to that I collided into the Alto. The maruti 800 behind was able to escape. smart guy.

I did not ran as I thought I was not at fault. We are standing in the middle of the intersection after the collision.

But I was wrong as the person who hits from the rear is at fault and in this case it was me. At the end I have to give 800rs to the alto guy as there was not much damage except for some scratches as his tail light area but due to traffic signal the traffic police came at the scene so left with no choice.

I always used to feel that I was at no fault, but after reading this thread I realizes that somewhere I was also at fault.

[issigonis]

SuperSelect,

After reading through your post and the responses by members, I appreciate their correct advice and the norms that one has to comply with when following a car in front. I remember I was in a roughly similar position, some two years ago when I was returning from a Mumbai -Amby Valley trip. On one of the flyovers approaching Chembur on my way back to Mumbai, a car (forget the make) swerved and then braked hard to avoid a cyclist who had come in its way unexpectedly. The two cars following the first one were able to brake safely and avoided rear ending each other,literally by inches.

I was driving uphill with three other people in my Indica DLS at about 60-65 kmph and I am happy to say ( my reflexes!) that I braked safely to stop my car about three feet from the car in front. Following me was a Ford Ikon which I had passed before I reached the flyover, which couldn't brake enough and rear ended me. The chap had had his ego brusied a bit by my overtaking ( I presume) and was rashly following me. Following the Ikon was a Premier Padmini ( now you know why I am rambling so much) which also could not stop in time, which was followed by another car, with the same unfortunate result.

After reading this post, I think I should have taken the Ikon driver to task. To be fair, I escaped with no serious damage (nothing for the passengers except a mild shock and jolts, had to change the rear hatch door), however, the Ikon was a gone case with its fluids all flowing freely on the flyover, like a mortally wounded Martian. Felt sorry for the Padmini driver (although I now know better).

Anyway, point #3 as stated above is critical : maintain safe braking distance from the car in front even if the car following you keeps creeping up and displays no road manners!

Its a relief to know that you weren't driving your Fiat!

Regards

[smooth]

Hope you have the car number and the owner name/phone number and you can claim from the insurance for the repairs?

I do not think we need this information to claim the insurance. At least I never have to give these information.
May be it is different in city to city.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by smooth

I do not think we need this information to claim the insurance. At least I never have to give these information.
May be it is different in city to city.

No,it is not a must. But if the number was noted and a case was booked, the Indica's insurance would have paid for the Swift's repairs under third party liability.

[smooth]

Originally Posted by Gansan

No,it is not a must. But if the number was noted and a case was booked, the Indica's insurance would have paid for the Swift's repairs under third party liability.

Thanks for the information Gansan.

In that case the money will only come when it is proved in the court that the Indica was at fault. Now how much time this will take, that will a altogether different matter.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by smooth

Thanks for the information Gansan.

In that case the money will only come when it is proved in the court that the Indica was at fault. Now how much time this will take, that will a altogether different matter.

That depends on the extent of the banged car's damages,and the compromise the owner is able to arrive at with the banger! The willingness to wait, I mean. And the matter being proved in court arises only when the second party refuses to own up. Most will, when they realize it will go definitely against them in court. Even the cops will tell them so.

[Samurai]

I was driving in the roads by 1986, and got my 2-wheeler license in 1988 and 4-wheeler license in 1992. But I really learnt proper driving in USA in 1993, in order to pass the DL test. That means for 7 years I drove in Bangalore roads with total disregard and in ignorance of general traffic rules, like most Indian drivers. You can't really blame the drivers for this, the licensing process in India doesn't really care whether you really learn driving. Most drivers here just control their vehicles. Driving is much more beyond mere control of vehicle. Driving is about how to co-exist with other vehicles and pedestrians on the road, how to be predictable on the road, how to be courteous to others, how to be safe for oneself and others.

Therefore, whenever there is an accident, most people have no clue who is technically at fault. Often fault is assigned based on who has bigger vehicle, looks richer, who talks louder, who braked suddenly, etc. Couple years back a biker rear-ended my father-in-law's car and then asked my father-in-law to pay up for making a sudden stop for a cow. It took a passing-by police SI to intervene and tell the biker it was his fault.

It is really hectic for drivers who know the driving rules to drive in India. Getting angry glares from ignorant drivers when you do the right thing is very common.

Indian drivers learn proper driving only under certain special circumstances.

• Learn it abroad.
• Learn from a knowledgeable driver in the family, like a parent or bigger brother.
• Learn by keen observation and via Internet sources (this is rare though).

It is really a tragedy that driving schools in India only focus on getting the DL and not teaching proper driving or traffic rules. My driving instructor in Bangalore in 1992 taught me the fine art of riding half-clutch most of the time.

In case of a rear-end collision there is only one culprit, the guy who couldn't stop in time.

[RX135]

While maintaining safe distance is responsibility of vehicle on rear side, it is responsibility of the vehicle in front to,

a) Indicate that he is taking a turn. (Did he have indicators on, or did he just brake?)
b) to avoid dangerous driving.

Sudden braking *for no reason* is not allowed either. However, I believe, the onus lies on defendant to prove that, the sudden braking was NOT done to avoid any accident like situation and amounted to dangerous driving. Since this is normally not possible, the blame always goes to rear vehicle.

Here, the driving of Honda City was dangerous and hence punishable but, proving that is going to be almost impossible. (Unless a traffic cop witnessed it).

[Dippy]

Sorry to hear of the damage Ravi but as echoed by everyone else, it is indeed the guy behind you who is at fault. He should not be close behind you in the first place.

I had a similar episode on New Year's eve. I was on my way to work in the morning when a car braked in front of me. Because I always keep more than half a car distance to the car infront, I managed to stop. I was not so lucky as a tourist Sumo who was driving really close rammed me from the rear. The thud was so loud that I feared my ear was a goner. The Honda took it well though and I ended up with a broken bumper which i got fixed a a local bumper repair guy. Since there was traffic accumulating, I couldnt wait to argue.

[Surprise]

Originally Posted by RX135

Sudden braking *for no reason* is not allowed either

Thanks for pointing this. This was not mentioned anywhere in this thread & I remember someone posting the related rule here in this forum.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Surprise

Thanks for pointing this. This was not mentioned anywhere in this thread & I remember someone posting the related rule here in this forum.

However, he also pointed out that it is almost impossible to use that as a defence.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by Samurai

However, he also pointed out that it is almost impossible to use that as a defence.

+1 to this. It is not "almost". It will be impossible to prove. The errant driver will even say he felt a sudden spell of giddiness and braked! How can one disprove that?

[RX135]

Originally Posted by Gansan

+1 to this. It is not "almost". It will be impossible to prove. The errant driver will even say he felt a sudden spell of giddiness and braked! How can one disprove that?

Well, now he wouldn't take a clean U-turn on account of giddiness, would he? ;-)

Jokes apart, he might as well say that he had slowed down and flashed indicator before taking U-turn. As I mentioned, it's hard to prove that he didn't do that and, whatever he did, amounted to rash driving, unless drivers of all trailing vehicles come together and testify that (again almost impossible).

[raj_5004]

when any car rear ends yours, its always the rear car's fault, whatever maybe the reason.

if your car cant stop in time & you obviously know that, then why dint you keep a larger/safer gap?

the car in front of you can brake any time (due to infinite reasons!) & you cannot blame him for that.

i do agree that what the white honda city did was not right but he cannot be blamed for the indica driver's fault.