Who would be at fault?

[umop]

Assume there are no dashcams or witnesses.

Say you're driving on a small residential street (30-40km/h limit) with one lane in each direction.

There's one car in front of you that, just for example, is looking for an address and slows down a bit, maybe comes to a stop for a second or two, maybe is just moving along at a crawl for a bit.

You wait a few seconds to see if they will remain like that or get back up to the limit and continue driving along.

They are moving slow enough that you decide to pass them but right when you start passing them they accelerate and there is contact between the vehicles.

Who will be at fault? I know cars that are stopped on the side of the road have to give the right of way to traffic that is already moving but this is different. The other car isn't parked. They just slowed down for a bit.

You will argue that they slowed down/stopped for a long enough time that you felt the need to pass them. They will argue that they only slowed down for a second or two (even though it was more than that and even though they may have actually come to a stop).

What would happen?

[broc]

Um, if you are passing someone driving slower than you, you wait til the lane is clear before you move back into it.

[umop]

I don't think you understand what I'm saying.

[hitman_24]

The passing car is at fault

[joepoonie]

The passing car is always at fault here because it's your responsibility to make sure that the first car is actually stopped and the way is clear for you to make your move.

[liquid11]

Passing car is at fault. As the "passer" you have to ensure that it is safe to pass.

[hdom]

Always the car behide, in this case passing.

[Super_Chicken]

Can you explain this part again?


They are moving slow enough that you decide to pass them but right when you start passing them they accelerate and there is contact between the vehicles.

Is this when you are moving back into the lane after performing the pass?

[athomas]

If you are moving into a lane that is occupied by another vehicle, then it is up to you to yield to that vehicle. If they accelerate, then it is up to you to realize that and make sure you give yourself enough room to pull back into the lane safely. There can be extenuating circumstance such that the other car had extreme acceleration capabilities and closed the gap in an unreasonable amount of time. You would need witnesses for that, though, unless the accelerating car left rubber on the road.

[george__]

Doesn't this depend on the marking on the road?

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/handbook/section3.4.0.shtml
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/handbook/section2.7.0.shtml

I think passing car is at fault likely though

[vero95]

the vehicle being overtaken is at fault based on subsection 148. (2) of HTA


Vehicles or equestrians overtaken

(2) Every person in charge of a vehicle or on horseback on a highway who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the overtaking vehicle or equestrian to pass. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 148 (2).

[jordanr19871]

so you were going to pass on the left
as you merge back into the right lane the slow car accelerates
and his front driverside fender hits your passenger rear bumper?

[greybrick]

According to the IBC, if the road is a two lane road (one in each direction) and the vehicle you're passing turns into you as you pass you're going to be 50% at fault. On the other hand, if the road is a four+ lane road (two or more lanes running in each direction) and the automobile in the outside lane improperly turns into or across the inside lane he will be 100% at fault.

[DJ_Peanuts22]

The passing car is at fault since it failed to wait until it was safe to pass.

[vero95]

According to the IBC, if the road is a two lane road (one in each direction) and the vehicle you're passing turns into you as you pass you're going to be 50% at fault. On the other hand, if the road is a four+ lane road (two or more lanes running in each direction) and the automobile in the outside lane improperly turns into or across the inside lane he will be 100% at fault.

if we are talking about insurance rules and not HTA, those rules should only apply if the vehicle overtaken (A) is not at fault with ordinary rules of law, no?

(2) The degree of fault of the insured shall be determined in accordance with the ordinary rules of law,
and not in accordance with these rules,
(a) if the driver of automobile “A” involved in the incident is charged with a driving offence; and
(b) if the driver of automobile “B” is wholly or partly at fault, as otherwise determined under these
rules, for the incident.

http://www.ibc.ca/en/car_insurance/documents/brochure/on-fault-determination-rules.pdf

[vero95]

The passing car is at fault since it failed to wait until it was safe to pass.

you can't accelerate when being overtaken, no?

[PPiL]

It happened to my brother. The guy slowed down, almost stopped on side of the street in a residential area, my brother decide to pass him, finally the guy decide to take back his lane and hit my brother.

The insurance declared my brother at fault because it was his responsibility to make sure he could safely pass the other guy

[vero95]

It happened to my brother. The guy slowed down, almost stopped on side of the street in a residential area, my brother decide to pass him, finally the guy decide to take back his lane and hit my brother.

The insurance declared my brother at fault because it was his responsibility to make sure he could safely pass the other guy

then it would be an easy scam: whenever you see a car overtaking you and changing lanes in front of you, just hit the gas pedal and slam into him. it's always his fault