How Fault Works in Rear-End and T-Bone Car Crashes
Rear-end crashes and T-bone collisions are two crash types that come up often in injury claims. The name of the crash describes how the vehicles met, but it does not decide who was at fault. A car accident attorney looking at either type of crash usually begins with the sequence of events, from each car's speed to the signals that controlled traffic.
What causes rear-end collisions
Many state traffic laws bar drivers from following another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, taking into account the speed of traffic and the condition of the road. Distracted driving is a common factor. NHTSA notes that sending or reading a text takes a driver's eyes off the road for 5 seconds, which at 55 mph is like driving the length of a football field with eyes closed. A car crash lawyer may ask for the other driver's phone records when distraction is suspected.
In many rear-end crashes the trailing driver is found at fault, yet that result is not automatic. A vehicle that cuts in and stops short, brake lights that fail or a vehicle backing up may shift part or all of the fault. In a multi-vehicle pileup, every impact is its own event, and a middle car pushed into the car ahead may not be at fault for that second impact.
Neck injuries after a rear-end crash
Rear-end impacts are often associated with whiplash, a neck injury caused by the head snapping back and forth. Neck pain and headaches may not show up until hours after the crash, which is one reason prompt medical care matters. Insurance companies sometimes challenge injury claims after low-speed rear-end crashes, citing minor vehicle damage. Photos of both cars and the medical records help respond to that argument, together with imaging such as an MRI when a doctor orders it.
How T-bone collisions happen
In a T-bone crash, the front of one vehicle strikes the side of another, usually at an intersection. Typical causes include failing to yield on a left turn and running a red light or a stop sign. A car's sides have less space to absorb crash forces than its front or rear, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) evaluates side protection in its own side-impact crash test. People seated on the struck side can suffer serious injuries such as traumatic brain injury or pelvic fractures.
Disputes in these crashes often come down to who had the right of way. Useful evidence includes signal timing records, intersection camera video, nearby business surveillance footage, dashcam video and witness statements, plus the event data recorder (EDR) in each car, which may store speed and braking data from the seconds before impact. A car crash lawyer typically moves quickly to collect video, because many systems record over old footage within days or weeks.
Comparative negligence in these crashes
Fault is not always all or nothing. Most states apply some form of comparative negligence, which reduces a recovery by the injured person's percentage of fault. In states with modified comparative negligence, a person whose fault reaches 50 or 51 percent, depending on the state, may be barred from recovery, while pure comparative negligence allows a reduced recovery at any level of fault. A few jurisdictions still apply contributory negligence, which can bar recovery for any fault at all. A car accident attorney will know which rule applies in the state where the crash happened.
A note on deadlines
Every state sets its own statute of limitations for injury claims, and claims against a government agency can require written notice much sooner. This article is general information, not legal advice, and it cannot predict the outcome of any claim.