Most places are like that. The reasoning is this: if you rear-end someone, it's *clearly* because you were following too close (or weren't paying
attention) - if you were following the proper 2-3s gap, you could manuever around him, or break in time. If the roads were icy, then clearly 2-3 wasn't
enough, and you should have given a greater gap.
The only time you get around that is if it's a clear case of insurance fraud - AKA they did it on purpose. And let me tell you, the cops and insurance
companies are *good* at finding that out these days.
Fun tidbits:
-If you have a read-end collision, the #1 thing you want to happen is to be in a pileup - that is, someone behind you read-ends you as well. The
'fault' always flows down to the last person in a pile-up chain.
-If you're pulling out a driveway or parking lot, and someone hits the front of your car, you're at fault, even if you couldn't see them and they
were going too fast.
-If you're backing out of a spot, and someone backs into you, the person who was out the least is at fault, even if they started moving first.
attention) - if you were following the proper 2-3s gap, you could manuever around him, or break in time. If the roads were icy, then clearly 2-3 wasn't
enough, and you should have given a greater gap.
The only time you get around that is if it's a clear case of insurance fraud - AKA they did it on purpose. And let me tell you, the cops and insurance
companies are *good* at finding that out these days.
Fun tidbits:
-If you have a read-end collision, the #1 thing you want to happen is to be in a pileup - that is, someone behind you read-ends you as well. The
'fault' always flows down to the last person in a pile-up chain.
-If you're pulling out a driveway or parking lot, and someone hits the front of your car, you're at fault, even if you couldn't see them and they
were going too fast.
-If you're backing out of a spot, and someone backs into you, the person who was out the least is at fault, even if they started moving first.