Imagine the following situation. A driver 'A' long-distance driving on a highway at a speed of 70-80 km / h with his car. Although it does not rain, the pavement is wet because it rained earlier. Suddenly a carriage of those who do not need this card you miss a stop. The driver of the car tries to stop, but hit the brakes and the car skids have rained. In response, the driver tries to avoid the impact at all costs, knowing that the stroller would not withstand the shock to be virtually stopped and given the weakness of the material that is made basically plastic. Dodge the invading car into the opposite lane and hitting a car parked on the roadside. Final result the driver to the hospital with a mild concussion and several hours of observation and two wrecked cars (the one in the shoulder and traveling on the road). The stroller that caused the incident to skip a stop sign did not intervene at all in the accident and initially have no responsibility, this will have to resolve at trial. Meanwhile the head of the accident is the driver 'A', which will see their insurance pay the car that was parked on the shoulder as his car ends up in the scrapyard.
If the driver 'A' had just envestida the stroller one would have questioned their responsibility for the accident. Surely the occupants had suffered serious injuries or even fatalities could talk. A driver probably would not have had anything more serious than it already was dodging the stroller. And while your car probably would have ended in the dismantling, which it did, the insurance will indemnify the other vehicle.
it I the only one who sees a paradox in this situation?
PS: This is not it happened to me, but if someone really nearby.
Well, at least we were not home when it was raided. No one was injured. We're all together and well. lost a few of our nice things, but things are not really important.
hard to believe how often we forget it
0 comments:
Post a Comment