Legal Question in Traffic Law in Virginia

Re: fender bender

If in fact you were fully stopped at the light and the driver to the rear collided with your vehicle, this driver would be adjudged negligent and therefore "at fault", to use your terminology.

If, however, you, in some way shape or form, permitted your vehicle to roll back into his, the

reverse, of course, would be true and you would be adjudged the negigent one and, consequently, "at fault" in this particular situation.

If the matter comes to trial, in the absence of credible corroborative evidence for the claims of

either of the parties, it will be your word against his.(Photographs can often be very useful in these kinds of situations which should include shots of the damage to both vehicles[if any]as well as any skid marks on the road or other illuminating tire tracks. Unfortunately, I assume that like most people you do not carry a camera in your vehicle and therefore cannot avail yourself of what could be dispositive evidence in this matter.)

As a further note on this matter, police officers typically do not become involved in minor accidents in assessing evidence, writing and submitting reports, etc., in situations where there has been no injury to persons and/or serious damage to property.

Re: fender bender

If in fact you were fully stopped at the light and the driver to the rear collided with your vehicle, this driver would be adjudged negligent and therefore "at fault", to use your terminology.

If, however, you, in some way shape or form, permitted your vehicle to roll back into his, the

reverse, of course, would be true and you would be adjudged the negigent one and, consequently, "at fault" in this particular situation.

If the matter comes to trial, in the absence of credible corroborative evidence for the claims of

either of the parties, it will be your word against his.(Photographs can often be very useful in these kinds of situations which should include shots of the damage to both vehicles[if any]as well as any skid marks on the road or other illuminating tire tracks. Unfortunately, I assume that like most people you do not carry a camera in your vehicle and therefore cannot avail yourself of what might have been dispositive evidence in this matter.)

As a further note on this matter, police officers typically do not become involved in minor accidents in assessing evidence, writing and submitting reports, etc., in situations where there has been no injury to persons and/or serious damage to property.

Re: fender bender

If you are hit from behind, the driver who hit you is almost always at fault, no question about it. The exception would be if you turned ONTO the road, into the driver's lane, leaving insufficient space for the other driver to stop. But if you were on that road, you have the right of way, and the other driver is automatically at fault. The wrong is that the other driver failed to keep his car under control. That is, no matter what you do or don't do, the other driver is still obligated to watch where he is going and to keep his car under control. Even if you drive badly, it is still his responsibility to drive his car carefully, no matter what (as long as you did not swerve in front of him from another road, turning into the road.)

What you describe sounds like the other driver is not only 1000% guilty and liable to you for any damage, but also a moron to complain about you.

A driver is absolutely responsible to look in front of him and to see that he has a clear path before proceeding. If you had not yet started to move at the light, and the driver behind you started to move without seeing first that he had a clear path, he is guilty as guilty can be under Virginia law.