please explain whos at fault?

Ellie

i agree, the lamb owner is completely responsible, however i don't think he would pay for the damages

Joe P

actually lamb owner is responsible

Neveah

lamb owner is responsible

blondie1990

the lamb owner is responsible for letting the lamb loose onto the road.

J G

Some conflicting answers, but I can state with 100% certainty that your wife was at fault: You should always travel at a speed that means you can stop within your field of vision, as impractical as it sounds.
I live in Mid Wales in a sheep farming area, and yes, this does mean driving on some roads at 5mph towards a brow or blind bend - perhaps that's why I've never hit a car or lamb in a quarter of a century!
HOWEVER, the farmer who owns the lamb IS responsible for allowing the lamb to escape - but this only covers the first car, had it been damaged by hitting a farm animal.
Trust me, happens all the time.

Timbo is here

Wifes fault - she failed to drive at a speed where she could stop within the distance she could see that the road was clear in.

grenmatta

Your wife drove over a blind summit in the wet at 30mph?

Rule 1: You should always be able to stop in the distance you can see is safe.

Perhaps your wife should take some advanced driving lessons - it might get her premiums back down. If you can't see she was in the wrong maybe you should join her.

WelshLad

She is at fault - she rear ended the car in front.

Fred C

Think about it: the novice stopped safely, the next car stopped safely, your wife couldn't stop safely.
Obviously the novice and the second driver drove to conditions. Your wife skidded, she was not driving to conditions as I see it. You say it was a blind summit, so she drove at a speed that gave a stopping distance greater than her visibility limit, on wet pavement as well.
Sorry, it wasn't what you wanted to hear.

BSMGUY

Your good lady is clearly at fault. She failed to stop within the distance that she could see.

oscar

driving in a manner as to be unable to stop in the distance you can see to be clear
had you or the other person hit the lamb you would still be to blame and would have to pay compensation to the farmer
that's one of those weird laws that still exists

-Stuart-

I'm sorry to say that your wife is completely at fault.

It's always the driver's responsibility to be going at a suitable speed to be able to stop safely if there is an obstruction ahead, no matter how sudden or unexpected. So if you hit another car from behind, it's always your fault.

It's tempting to think that the lamb-owner was actively negligent and caused the obstruction, but even if they were (and you might end up with large legal bills trying to establish that) it would still have been your wife's responsibility to be able to stop in time.

I'm sure many others would have been driving the same way as your wife. We probably all go too fast most of the time. You were unlucky on this occasion that something was stopped over that summit.

Death

it's your fault. you rear ended them. you were driving to fast for the conditions and unable to stop in time. sorry but it seems that you'll have to pay.

ken k

she is the culprit/you have to have your car under control and its apparent she did not

Carl

YOUR WIFE ! ... you cannot blame anyone else for her not being in total control of the car im afraid , when on the road you must drive for the unexpected .sorry mate but she must eat humble pie on this occasion .

Bandit

Well honestly from a neutral point of view your wife is to blame, without going into too much detail, if she was travelling at a speed relevant to the road conditions and travelling a safe distance behind the vehicle in front etc then she would have stopped in time. It might not be what you want to hear but its an honest answer.

Kenny

Good luck getting the owner of the property that the lamb was on to pay for it. Let me ask you this. If you were the car sitting behind the learner and someone hit you, who would you say is at fault. The fact that the tires skidded tells me that she had time to react. She just was not paying attention to the fact that it was raining and that there was a summit in the road. I always slow down when coming over a hill or turn that I cannot see very well.

I don't mean to be so cold, but your wife hit the other car. If the roles were reversed, wouldn't you expect the person who hit you to accept liability?

Locksmith

failure to have complete control of vehicle during bad weather

cuffyn

Your wife is at fault, driving 30mph over a blind summit. You are suppose to reduce your speed in wet weather at least. If she had been going at a speed suitable to the weather and road conditions then she would of been able to stop in plenty of time.

www.CyberCrimeOps.COM

If you crash into the rear of another vehicle for whatever reason, it is always your fault. It means that your wife was travelling too fast for the road conditions. Any Traffic Cop will say the same. The person your wife hit cannot be held responsible at all.

taxed till i die,and then some.

Your wife is to blame,Driving with undue care and attention.

Sal*UK

Hmm at the end of the day, you should be driving at a speed able to stop if required. As your wife was driving over possibly a blind summit, she should have been crawling. Let your insurers sort it out - thats what you pay them for.

Facile Princeps

You wife is at fault, approaching a blind summit at 30 mph in the wet is plain stupid

Ansell A

Here fault and responsibility.
You are always supposed to drive in a manner where you are able to stop in time.
If you were approaching a blind summit on a wet day then you should have slowed down sufficiently to be able to stop or avoid any stationery vehicles over the brow.

Edit. The lamb owner would have been responsible had the first car crashed because of it - but not for the accident the op described as by then there were stationery cars and that is the last drivers responsibility.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: