Rear-End Collision: Following Distance, Fault, and Claim Consequences
A fully loaded Class 1 tractor-trailer is travelling at 90 km/h on a two-lane highway in light rain. The driver is 18 metres behind a compact car. The car's brake lights come on and it stops abruptly for a deer; the truck driver brakes hard but strikes the car, pushing it into the ditch. The car driver suffers a whiplash injury and the car is a write-off. The truck's front bumper, grille, and radiator are damaged, and the load shifts forward, cracking two pallets. The truck driver says the car "stopped for no reason" and that the deer had already left the road. Police attend and note the truck's following distance and the wet surface. The trucking company's insurer and the car owner's insurer are now in contact.
1. Assess fault for the collision. What facts matter most, and how does the loaded-truck stopping distance change the analysis?
Read the worked answer
Fault will likely rest primarily with the truck driver. A driver must be able to stop for a hazard ahead, and rear-ending a vehicle that was visible and braking is the classic following-too-closely failure. The 18-metre gap at 90 km/h is far short of what a loaded tractor-trailer needs on wet pavement; a heavy combination can require well over 100 metres to stop, so the gap left no margin even if the car braked hard. The car's reason for stopping is largely irrelevant: a deer on the road is a legitimate hazard, and brake lights are a clear signal to slow. The truck driver's claim that the deer had left does not help, because the car's stop was already visible. The police note on following distance and wet surface supports the car owner's position. The truck driver may bear full or predominant fault, with possible minor contributory fault if the car stopped without any hazard, which the facts do not support.
2. Explain how the claim will likely be handled between the insurers and what the trucking company should expect regarding its own damage and the injured driver.
Read the worked answer
The car owner's insurer will likely pursue the trucking company's insurer for the car's write-off value and the injury claim, since fault sits with the truck. The trucking company's liability coverage should respond to the third-party bodily injury and property damage, subject to limits. Its own physical damage claim for the bumper, grille, and radiator depends on carrying collision coverage and the deductible; if the policy is liability-only, the company absorbs that repair. The pallet damage is cargo loss, which requires separate cargo coverage and is not paid under the auto policy. The injured car driver's claim may include medical and lost income, and the trucking company should report the collision promptly, preserve the driver's logs and the truck's brake and load records, and avoid direct contact with the claimant. The company should also expect a premium or safety-rating review after an at-fault collision.