The Traffic Accident Reconstruction Origin -ARnews-

Re: Who gets the PCF on this collision??

Don Davis (DJCJDVS@GTE.net)
Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:46:15 -0500 (EST)

Tim, You wanted opinions! D-2 would be the PCF in this case. D-2 is required to yield the right-of-way to approaching vehicles so close as to constitute a hazard. If D-1 was going the other way, you definitely would be correct in using the "reasonable expectation" line of thinking. The fact is, D-1 was behind another vehicle and WAS close enough to constitute a hazard. The fact D-1 committed any violations is beside the point. None of the violations committed by D-1 were the proximate cause of the collision. If D-1 would have stayed directly behind the other vehicle, the collision still would have happened. If D-2 waits until the van makes it's turn, and she has a clear view, she sees V-1 approaching and thinks better of pulling out. D-2 did not have a clear view of approaching traffic and was going to commit a right-of-way violation DESPITE the actions by D-1. As far as an associated factor? I have trouble finding D-1 partially at fault since the violations she committed
apparently did not contribute to the occurrence of the collision. You may want to cite her for one of the violations and use the report in court as a basis for your actions. I tend to leave a decision like that up to the Investigating Officer. My qualifications: Accident Investigation Review Officer Modesto CHP, trained in Advanced Accident Investigation and Traffic Accident Reconstruction, Associate Member of CHP Central Division M.A.I.T. P.S.- The Annotated(sp?) Vehicle Code sections may give you some assistance. They cite civil law decisions, but get real specific on what constitutes a violation of what section. I have, however, been warned against quoting the annotated codes in a report since they deal with civil law. I was told to just use them as a reference. As far as the background of the involved parties, I know how you feel! Too bad the "who" of a person tends to outwiegh the "what" of their actions, in some minds! The facts be damned! Good Luck.
Don Davis
DJCJDVS@GTE.net

NOTE: You are reading in an archived session of ARnews. It is possible that this topic is still being discussed. To see if this topic is still active, or of there were any more recent posts on this topic, check later archives of ARnews.

If there is no current post, and you would like to add to this topic, link to the Current ARnews Discussion and begin a new thread. Be sure that if you are starting a new post that the thread title does not contain the abbreviation RE: Placing RE: at the beginning of a new post will confuse Hypermail and prevent others from answering your post in the future.

For example, to continue this discussion look for a thread titled

Who gets the PCF on this collision??

If this thread does not exist in the current archive, you can begin another one by using that title.