Accident: Read ended

my statement says he was driving close to me so when we slowed down the first time, he slammed his brakes and then high beamed me. then we came to a complete stop in traffic and he rear ended me.he then proceeded to threaten me and leave the scene without exchanging info.

>>15985844
>whos fault is it?

Doesnt matter. Dude is getting charged with hit and run

>>15985853
popo said they cant cause they cant prove he was driving. i didnt get a picture

>Other guy took off.

From what I've heard the other guy will get screwed while at most you'll get a slap on the wrist if you were at fault.

>>15985868
i cant have an at fault accident on my record though, it screws me for applying for jobs in my field right now

slap as in cuffs ? we dont do that here in that case

>>15985903
Slap on the wrist or hand would like a minor ticket if that.

>>15985916
ah i dont even get that. i just go to insurance company. we only have one here... its kind of bullshit

File: 1475969938811.jpg (722KB, 2268x4032px) Image search: [Google]

722KB, 2268x4032px

>>15985867
Why didnt you memorize some of his plate you dumbshit?

Would be damage on his car.

And next time don't explain more than you have to. Just should've said he was tailgating you the whole time and ran into you.

>>15985990
i have his plate dumb fuck its written there twice.

>>15985990
jeebus kryste i wanna take a bite

File: 1475894076769.jpg (278KB, 1080x1319px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1080x1319px

>>15986087
so why dont the cops go and get him? they dont need to prove anything you just id him.

stupid leaf

>>15986236
they won't do that here...

I've been rear ended twice, both drivers were on their cell phones at the time. One (a teenager), we just walked away from it. Another (an FBI agent), we had to report it. Minimal damage and in both cases it was considered a zero fault accident.

In the United States, generally, it's considered not-at-fault (100%) if you experience a hit-and-run. If the other driver had stayed and given his account to the cops, you may have been considered somewhat or majority at fault if you brake checked (and that's the way the cop wrote it up).

In Canada, it's likely similar, but you should talk to a lawyer.

>>15985844
At this stage you dun fucked up OP. NEVER EVER admit to brake checking or any such behaviours that basically implies you are at fault. Omit any details that are NOT in your favour. Deny when confronted. Then the onus is on the other party that's accused you of such things to prove it.

Now that you've told presumably the operator and the police on scene that you tapped your brakes, the best outcome for you is 50/50 found half at fault. You can bet your ass the other party, once identified, will use the 'he tried to brake check me' excuse. You're fucked. You fucked yourself.

"I was stopped because traffic ahead of me stopped. The truck hit me from behind." Shut the fuck up about everything else that happened beforehand, especially the stuff you did that paints you in a bad light.

>>15986273
what do you mean? they do that everywhere. thats the whole point of having vehicle plates

>>15985844
He rear ended you while driving aggressively. While following dangerously close. If this was in my state he'd be hit with reckless driving and be at fault.

>>15985844

Protip: Never, ever tell the cops you brake checked someone. Well its not illegal, its creating unsafe driving conditions and looks like you were purposely trying to get him to hit you.

Realistically you should have taken a picture of the guy and his license plate, unfortunately without much more proof the cops can't do much since they don't even have proof that the douche was driving it, much less hit your car.