Every OzBargainer loves a good forum post detailing some form of mishap on the roads. Sadly, there are no MS Paint drawings here (sorry to disappoint).
As it stands, when one vehicle collides into the rear of another, the driver of the rear car is deemed to be at fault. I’m unaware of whether there are any exceptions to the case, such as in the event the driver in front cut the rear driver off and/or is “brake-checking”, or perhaps the front driver is performing an illegal manoeuvre etc
From what I can gather, the reason the rear driver is (almost?) always seemed at fault is just for simplicity and helps insurance cases reach a decision. However, with the rise of technology such as Dash Cams, there is less reliance on a “he said/she said” situation, due to (somewhat) concrete evidence being made available.
I suppose the point of this thread is to ask what (if any) exceptions already exist to the “rear driver at fault” standard ruling, and if anyone has been involved in a situation where the rear driver wasn’t at fault. In addition, to query whether people would support some alterations to how these cases are ruled now that proper evidence is a factor.
Keen to hear stories and thoughts.
(Please excuse autocorrect errors as I’ve typed this on a phone).
This, unfortunately, is very common. Lots of people let their guard down at the scene when the other driver is there apologising, etc and expect that other driver will be honest during the claim later on.
The only way to protect yourself is, like you did, take lots of photos and videos on the positioning of the vehicles immediately after the incident (where it's safe to do so).