Who's At Fault?

Any time there's an auto accident, there is quite often an immediate reaction to find fault and ascertain who is ultimately responsible for the injuries and damages suffered in the collision.

Nobody wants to be guilty of causing an accident and it must be human nature to deny wrongdoing or assign blame elsewhere, whether it is true or not. Accidents are, well...accidental, and anything else might be considered attempted murder perhaps.If there is an accident, the involved parties are likely going to think it was the fault of "the other guy"!

Of course, the first course of action after an accident should always be attendance to those who are injured, and calling for the police, ambulance, or other emergency services. You may even be injured yourself and need medical attention, so all other concerns should be secondary.

Fault will inevitably be assigned by the police during the initial investigation. Sometimes this is fairly simple and straight forward, especially in minor fender benders. Other times, the investigation takes a long time and may involve traffic accident reconstruction experts, especially if there are serious injuries or a fatality. And, even should the police assign fault, legal action could change that should a judge determine guilt different to that of the initial investigation.

Naturally, accidents and injuries are the reason why we have insurance, as even the costs associated with a minor fender bender can add up quickly. And just consider how an individual would fare should they face the financial consequences of a serious injury or death. Assigning fault is an enivitability and the guilty party will responsible for costs associated with the accident. Sometimes this cost is indirect, as claims for "at fault accidents" are a determining factor for insurance premiums.

As for that assigning of fault and how it may not be clear as to who is guilty, consider a rear end accident scenario where there is often an assumption that the fault automatically lies with the driver of the vehicle who runs into the back of the car in front. But hang on a second! Did that car in front pull out of a side street or parking stall and not give the other vehicle any chance to avoid the accident? Or did they change lanes and cut in front of the other vehicle without allowing for a proper following distance, then slamming on their brakes and getting rear-ended? Suddenly things are not so cut and dry!

So, what's the point of all this talk about fault? It was meant to bring up a couple of points, one being that we all have a duty to drive in such a way that we prevent accidents. Defensive driving is meant to prevent accidents due to the action or inaction of other drivers, regardless of who's at fault. Regardless of fault and regardless of which vehicle operators or passengers are injured and/or killed, no-one wants to be part of that horrible scenario. Even the mental health implications can be difficult to deal with, like PTSD!

Secondly, think of the other costs associated with an accident. Car repairs, damage to property, emergency services response, hospital bills, physiotherapy. Yes, it may all be covered by insurance and our national health care system, but we, as consumers, are the ones paying for it with our taxes or our premiums and inevitably the cost will trickle down.

The government has been critisized for raising taxes and lately the same can be said for the insurance industry in raising their rates. In the case of the latter,  as with any business they are there to make a profit and when that stops happening, rates will rise. If you think of the underlying cause of profit loss being accidents and injury claims, suffice to say that if we all took a bit more care and avoided these scenarios altogether, those rates will stabalize.

Ultimately, we all want to get to where we're going safely and in good time, and need to watch out for one another, avoiding the devestating cost of accidents. Drive safe...drive defensively!