G
gregflee
Guest
A meat truck was changing lanes to his right and hit the back corner of my car. The driver, realizing
that it occurred on a freeway and thus no witnesses, lied to his insurance company, saying I was
merging left and hit his front bumper with the back corner of my car (he has no damages, only I do). His
company's insurer of course took his word, and my insurer won't fight for me because I don't carry
collision coverage, so I have to fight- and here's my question.
I've heard there are laws in California which say something to the effect of "if you hit someone in
front of you, you are liable; if someone from behind hits you, they are liable." Is this true? And could
that apply to me even if the impact point of the accident was technically on the side of my car (right near
the back corner)?
In other words, can I argue he's liable because he hit me towards the rear of my vehicle with the front of
his, even if it technically wasn't a pure rear-ending situation?
Thanks so much for any help...
that it occurred on a freeway and thus no witnesses, lied to his insurance company, saying I was
merging left and hit his front bumper with the back corner of my car (he has no damages, only I do). His
company's insurer of course took his word, and my insurer won't fight for me because I don't carry
collision coverage, so I have to fight- and here's my question.
I've heard there are laws in California which say something to the effect of "if you hit someone in
front of you, you are liable; if someone from behind hits you, they are liable." Is this true? And could
that apply to me even if the impact point of the accident was technically on the side of my car (right near
the back corner)?
In other words, can I argue he's liable because he hit me towards the rear of my vehicle with the front of
his, even if it technically wasn't a pure rear-ending situation?
Thanks so much for any help...