-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Geico is Evil
- Thread starter Mike703
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
justaninsured
Junior Member
I think what the posters are trying to tell you is that you were following too closely for the driving conditions and so, if it goes to court, you will probably lose and be out lawyer fees as well damages. Take it for what it's worth but if you had been following at a safe distance, you would have been able to avoid the other car and not had to lock up your brakes. In wet conditions, you should have allowed more stopping distance so that is not an excuse. Probably not what you want to hear.
By the way, if you didn't see the disabled car, perhaps she didn't either if the car in front of her managed to avoid it.
By the way, if you didn't see the disabled car, perhaps she didn't either if the car in front of her managed to avoid it.
I am not a lawyer. This is my opinion because I'm Old and read a lot. 
Actually car lengths is out of date.
Proper distance is now one second for every ten miles an hour.
In bad weather that distance should be increased.
If the car in front of you hits a solid wall, (stopping instantly) you are still supposed to have enough time to stop with out hitting the vehicle.
Actually car lengths is out of date.
Proper distance is now one second for every ten miles an hour.
In bad weather that distance should be increased.
If the car in front of you hits a solid wall, (stopping instantly) you are still supposed to have enough time to stop with out hitting the vehicle.