Just crashed my dad's car !need avise!
!Damn it! this is exaclty what i was afraid of, oh well, that's the way life is, you live and you learn, i just checked the yellow pages an most accident attorneys offer a free consultation so i guess i gotta get an appionment first thing tomorrow morning thanks for clearing that up.MasterMan wrote:yeah man, florida has nofault so that means if u hit a car anywhere in the back half of the car its your fault and if u hit it in the front half its their fault (inthinking that you didnt have time to stop) so yes if u hit it in the back it will be your fault.. no matter what..
it's a long story bro, don't even bother, hell the other guy is 38 years old and he didn't have one either.jdmfreak03 wrote:Dude you're 19 years old and you dont have a lisence?
-
C-Kwik
- Moderator
- Posts: 8070
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 9:28 pm
- Car: 2013 Chevy Volt, 1991 Honda CRX DX
No-fault does not have anything to do with who is considered responsible for an accident. It has to do with liabilty or more simply, how pay outs are determined when insurance companies or parties try to collect from each other. For example, pure comparative is when each party is responsible to pay based on their portion of liability. So if you are 25% at fault, you pay 25% of the person's damages. Then there is modified-comparative, it is something like if you are 51% or more at fault you pay for your portion of liability and if you are 50% or less, you pay nothing. Then there is contributory where it's something like if you are 1% at fault or more, you can't collect anything or that you can collect 100%(I can't remember which one). In no-fault, each party pays their own with some limited ability to try to collect from a negligent party. It has nothing to do with how negligence/fault itself is analyzed. Fault is still determined on a case by case basis and based on facts and the rules of the road. But it can affect whether or not you can collect damages from a negligent party. There are some differences when looking at it from a strategy standpoint in how you present a claim and what burden of proof you need, but when analyzing liabilty, it should be looked at the same way.
