Solid road rage incident. Who would have been at fault?

[YesterdayAgain]

OK, so I'm driving down a 3 lane highway on a rainy night last week. This POS fullsize van passes me doing about 10mph (~55mph) over the limit, then cuts in front of me with no signal or anything. I'm guessing there were < 2 car lengths between him and my car when he cut me off. I was a bit annoyed, so I threw my brights on to let him know there was, in fact, a car behind his steaming pile of welfare transportation.

So I drove behind him for about a mile until I could get into the far right lane where the road expands to 4 lanes and of course, I turned off my brights at that point. As I'm passing some of the traffic in the other lanes and going about my business, this guy sharply swerves across two lanes of traffic to cut me off. I had to brake to avoid him slamming into me. So I played it easy, (with my brights back on) and stayed behind him until I had room to safely pass his POS. Traffic clears about a mile up the road and the left lanes are open again, so I get into the left lane and try to get away from this tool and he starts to swerve into my lane again!! I had to swerve out of my lane to avoid a collision again. After that, he sharply swerved in the opposite direction and got off.

My question: I know I have better insurance than this low rent, welfare piece of human waste, so I was tinkering with the idea of just letting him hit me. I go get my car fixed with a shiny new paint job while his PL/PD doesn't do crap but pay my deductible. Where would the fault have been in this situation? I was afraid me riding my brights after he cut me off may have been an issue.

How does the officer handle this situation given it didn't escalate further after a collision? This is in Michigan.

 

[Machdup1]

I'm not a LEO, but there is a common sense answer to your question. Let me restate the facts from a different perspective. You were in the left lane holding up traffic. A van passes you and pulls in front of you missing you by 30 feet (2 car lengths). You escalate the situation by turning on your brights and leave them on to piss off the other driver. You turn off your brights and try to pass on the right, he cuts you off in a unsafe manner escalating the situation. You escalate the situation by turning your brights on and when you begin your passing move and he trys to cut you off again.

You want to know if it is O.K. to escalate the situation by allowing a motor vehicle accident instead of slowing down alittle and not turning on your brights and defusing the situation. You reacted in an emotional manner to him passing you incorrectly by turning on your brights. I believe that is a form of road rage. So you do not stand completely righteous and that would count against you. By the way, driving is not supposed to be a emotional activity.

His (let's say it turns out he is a polite guy with no record) perspective would be had passed someone in a reasonable manner (he's just a bad driver) and then the guy started acting crazy and he was scared and was trying to get off the road to avoid further problems and your lights had blinded him and he couldn't see your car passing on the right and the accident occured. If the LEO did not witness the accident and you admit to turning on your brights it may not work out entirely in your favor. It's much better to avoid the situation entirely.

 

[YesterdayAgain]

You were in the left lane holding up traffic.

I wasn't in the left lane, I was in the middle lane doing the speed limit. Plus, this was not a freeway. There isn't a fast lane or a passing lane.

You escalate the situation by turning on your brights and leave them on to piss off the other driver.

Agreed.

You turn off your brights and try to pass on the right, he cuts you off in a unsafe manner escalating the situation.

I wasn't necessarily trying to pass on the right, there is just another lane that opens up at that point. I was passing traffic because the lane was empty, allowing me to do the speed limit.

You want to know if it is O.K. to escalate the situation by allowing a motor vehicle accident instead of slowing down alittle and not turning on your brights and defusing the situation.

That's very selective wording of the situation. When someone is aggressively trying to HIT YOUR CAR, I don't think it is so crazy to not aggressively AVOID the situation if you have insurance.

You reacted in an emotional manner to him passing you incorrectly by turning on your brights. I believe that is a form of road rage. So you do not stand completely righteous and that would count against you. By the way, driving is not supposed to be a emotional activity.

His (let's say it turns out he is a polite guy with no record) perspective would be had passed someone in a reasonable manner (he's just a bad driver) and then the guy started acting crazy and he was scared and was trying to get off the road to avoid further problems and your lights had blinded him and he couldn't see your car passing on the right and the accident occured. If the LEO did not witness the accident and you admit to turning on your brights it may not work out entirely in your favor. It's much better to avoid the situation entirely.

I agree mostly. Stupid drivers just piss me off.

 

[FiaCobra]

I'm not a LEO, but there is a common sense answer to your question. Let me restate the facts from a different perspective. You were in the left lane holding up traffic. A van passes you and pulls in front of you missing you by 30 feet (2 car lengths). You escalate the situation by turning on your brights and leave them on to piss off the other driver. You turn off your brights and try to pass on the right, he cuts you off in a unsafe manner escalating the situation. You escalate the situation by turning your brights on and when you begin your passing move and he trys to cut you off again.

You want to know if it is O.K. to escalate the situation by allowing a motor vehicle accident instead of slowing down alittle and not turning on your brights and defusing the situation. You reacted in an emotional manner to him passing you incorrectly by turning on your brights. I believe that is a form of road rage. So you do not stand completely righteous and that would count against you. By the way, driving is not supposed to be a emotional activity.

His (let's say it turns out he is a polite guy with no record) perspective would be had passed someone in a reasonable manner (he's just a bad driver) and then the guy started acting crazy and he was scared and was trying to get off the road to avoid further problems and your lights had blinded him and he couldn't see your car passing on the right and the accident occured. If the LEO did not witness the accident and you admit to turning on your brights it may not work out entirely in your favor. It's much better to avoid the situation entirely.

I agree with that statement.

You should've just let him pass you the 1st time without using your brights. The guy didn't cut you off.....he was 2 car lengths in front of you, and apparently going faster. You were at fault.

Let me ask you this........do you know why he passed you? Perhaps he had someone in the van that needed medical attention.....perhaps he got a phone call from his wife saying his kid had an accident.....perhaps he just robbed the bank and was escaping with the loot and a fully loaded AK-47.....
You had no idea why he was in a rush. Why did you involve yourself? Next time, let them pass.

 

[YesterdayAgain]

The guy didn't cut you off.....he was 2 car lengths in front of you, and apparently going faster. You were at fault.

He absolutely cut me off and I was not even 1% at fault.

Let me ask you this........do you know why he passed you?

I could care less. None of those situations gives him the right to endanger myself or my passengers.

I'll admit I was partially in the wrong though.

 

[WTF]

By the way, driving is not supposed to be a emotional activity

If that were true, people wouldn't purchase and drive an assortment of cars that appeal to a person's emotions rather than practicality, such as a SVT Mustang Cobra from which this entire website is based on.

However we all know you are correct that it would have been a bad idea to act on road rage. If you had only just flashed your brights to let him know you were there instead of leaving it on, you probably could have gotten away with letting the accident occur since you would be the innocent victim in the judge's eyes.

 

[Machdup1]

If that were true, people wouldn't purchase and drive an assortment of cars that appeal to a person's emotions rather than practicality, such as a SVT Mustang Cobra from which this entire website is based on.

However we all know you are correct that it would have been a bad idea to act on road rage. If you had only just flashed your brights to let him know you were there instead of leaving it on, you probably could have gotten away with letting the accident occur since you would be the innocent victim in the judge's eyes.

Actually my statement stands. Driving in traffic is not an emotional experience. If you derive enjoyment from driving a particular car that's great, but anger and revenge has no place in driving on the streets. People who act on these emotions eventually get to have the fun experience of going before a judge to justify their actions.

 

[neatofrito1618]

He absolutely cut me off and I was not even 1% at fault.

How did he cut you off? If he's going 10 mph faster than you and pulls into your lane 2 car lengths ahead of you why would you get pissed off? I don't know where you live but I have people do that to me all the time and I do it to other people all the time also. As long as they're going moderately faster than you and there is at least 1-2 car lengths between you when he starts to get over I have no idea why you would be pissed.

 

[YesterdayAgain]

How did he cut you off? If he's going 10 mph faster than you and pulls into your lane 2 car lengths ahead of you why would you get pissed off? I don't know where you live but I have people do that to me all the time and I do it to other people all the time also. As long as they're going moderately faster than you and there is at least 1-2 car lengths between you when he starts to get over I have no idea why you would be pissed.

You don't know the laws of the road very well and are a crappy driver then. Score one for me for not living in Tampa. :banana:

 

[taronis]

what you should do:

IGNORE THE ASS,
GO ON YOUR WAY,
STOP FOR COFFEE...........
GO HOME AND PLOW YOUR OL' LADY

 

[FordSVTFan]

You don't know the laws of the road very well and are a crappy driver then. Score one for me for not living in Tampa. :banana:

Sorry dude, but violating the laws of the road and "cutting you off" are two different things. As described, the other driver's actions were probably unlawful, but he didnt cut you off. As pointed out, he was driving faster than you and had two car lengths in front of you. That is not being cut off and that is not endangering you.

And yes, we are happy you dont live in Tampa.:shrug:

 

[FiaCobra]

He absolutely cut me off and I was not even 1% at fault.

Again, i disagree with you. From what you stated, he mearly "passed" you. Being cut off and passed are two different things. You started the whole road rage thing by using your brights. Next time, let him pass or move to the right.

 

[YesterdayAgain]

Sorry dude, but violating the laws of the road and "cutting you off" are two different things. As described, the other driver's actions were probably unlawful, but he didnt cut you off. As pointed out, he was driving faster than you and had two car lengths in front of you. That is not being cut off and that is not endangering you.

And yes, we are happy you dont live in Tampa.:shrug:

I said < than two car lengths and I look at a car length as ~10ft. If I had to guess exactly, I would imagine he pulled into my lane (with no blinker) around 12-15ft ahead of me.

I don't know the specific laws, but I have always been under the impression you are to keep 1 car length between you and the car ahead of you for every 10 mph you are doing. I usually double that in the rain, so looked at it as being essentially cut off since he cut way into that margin, while speeding, without signaling, and in the rain.

I may have overreacted, but I still think the van was initially in the wrong.

 

[FordSVTFan]

I said < than two car lengths and I look at a car length as ~10ft. If I had to guess exactly, I would imagine he pulled into my lane (with no blinker) around 12-15ft ahead of me.

I don't know the specific laws, but I have always been under the impression you are to keep 1 car length between you and the car ahead of you for every 10 mph you are doing. I usually double that in the rain, so looked at it as being essentially cut off since he cut way into that margin, while speeding, without signaling, and in the rain.

I may have overreacted, but I still think the van was initially in the wrong.

The average car is more than 10 ft. long. Additionally 10 feet is a good amount of clearance. That aside, he didnt cause you to have to react in an responsive way. You didnt lock up your brakes, you didnt swerve out of his way and you did not even honk your horn to warn him of any impending collision. That being the case, you werent cut off. You were pissed off.

There is no doubt he was not a courteous driver, but you did quite a few things to escalate the situation.

 

[MassCobra]

If he were to swerve into your lane and hit you, in my book he caused the collision.
That's the short answer.

 

[YesterdayAgain]

The average car is more than 10 ft. long. Additionally 10 feet is a good amount of clearance. That aside, he didnt cause you to have to react in an responsive way. You didnt lock up your brakes, you didnt swerve out of his way and you did not even honk your horn to warn him of any impending collision. That being the case, you werent cut off. You were pissed off.

There is no doubt he was not a courteous driver, but you did quite a few things to escalate the situation.

OK, so I'll admit I may have jumped the gun a bit. If he would have hit me later though, how would the accident have been handled by the police?

 

[ImShakn]

If he were to swerve into your lane and hit you, in my book he caused the collision.
That's the short answer.

In some areas, mitigating circumstances may be taken into account. In my area both drivers can be charged with aggressive driving, which is a misdemeanor.

 

[FordSVTFan]

OK, so I'll admit I may have jumped the gun a bit. If he would have hit me later though, how would the accident have been handled by the police?

If what you describe is 100% accurate, based on that alone, he would be charged.

 

[PGreenSVT]

Coming over and nearly taking your fender off is "cutting you off", he was ampley clear of you to come over however he obviosly should have used his turn indicator. If you think he came over too quickly you should have given him a quick flash to let him know you didn't appreciate it and let it go. He would have probably continued on his way without incident. You created the situation by following with your high beams on for so long. I would have been pissed at you too. Everything after that you were both wrong plain and simple.

 

[C O B R A]

Florida....lol. Crazy ass drivers down here.