REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-22-2014, 07:55 PM   #1
My homepage has been set to RS
 
SpeedStars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,494
Thanked 3,690 Times in 857 Posts
Hill rollback and tail gaters

Hi everyone, not sure if this is the right area to post this but I'm wondering if you roll back (like less than 20cm) on a hill and you hit the car behind you, who would be at fault? Wondering this because I was on a really steep hill and this person behind me would not give me any room at all and I was VERY close to hitting them.
Advertisement
__________________
'16 WRX

'93 GSR
SpeedStars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2014, 08:23 PM   #2
RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Richmond
Posts: 4,989
Thanked 7,925 Times in 2,061 Posts
I would like to assume it would be the car behinds fault, since you need to leVe the appropriate distance between cars at stops.

Tha being said, it would be a he said she said situation and it would be deemed 50/50 unless the cars were equipped with rear facing dash cams or the car behind had a dash cam
320icar is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-22-2014, 09:11 PM   #3
My homepage has been set to RS
 
SpeedStars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,494
Thanked 3,690 Times in 857 Posts
damn, so I guess that as the car in front with the dashcam, it wouldn't make a difference...
__________________
'16 WRX

'93 GSR
SpeedStars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2014, 11:03 PM   #4
14 dolla balla aint got nothing on me!
 
kross9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Richmond
Posts: 627
Thanked 915 Times in 224 Posts
I remember seeing something like this else where. IIRC, the vehicle behind is supposed to is recommended to leave space
Quote:
162 (1) A driver of a vehicle must not cause or permit the vehicle to follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the amount and nature of traffic on and the condition of the highway.

(2) The driver of a commercial motor vehicle or a combination of vehicles, when driving on a roadway outside a business or residence district, must not follow within 60 m of another commercial motor vehicle or a combination of vehicles, but this must not be construed to prevent one commercial motor vehicle or a combination of vehicles overtaking and passing another.
(3) The driver of a motor vehicle in a caravan or motorcade, other than a funeral procession, outside a business or residence district, must leave sufficient space between his or her vehicle and another vehicle or combination of vehicles to enable a vehicle to enter and occupy that space without danger.
Divided highways
So, as long as they are within that they are clear so most likely would be 50/50.
kross9 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-23-2014, 12:16 AM   #5
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: not vancouver
Posts: 2,647
Thanked 1,938 Times in 765 Posts
A 20 cm rollback is a lot of rollback

A car within 20cm of ur car is most def not leaving enough room.

Technically the butt hugged behind is wrong, morally, you're wrong for your inability to do a hill start.

There is a hand break for a reason, use it, never roll back.
4444 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-23-2014, 01:48 AM   #6
I bringith the lowerballerith
 
H.Specter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: y
Posts: 1,199
Thanked 4,569 Times in 572 Posts
The person rolling back would be at fault since they are in care, custody and control of their vehicle.
H.Specter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2014, 02:53 AM   #7
My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
 
Fafine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 3,244
Thanked 1,254 Times in 394 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4444 View Post
A 20 cm rollback is a lot of rollback

A car within 20cm of ur car is most def not leaving enough room.

Technically the butt hugged behind is wrong, morally, you're wrong for your inability to do a hill start.

There is a hand break for a reason, use it, never roll back.
Some people can't drive standard properly.
Fafine is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-23-2014, 06:40 AM   #8
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kross9 View Post
I remember seeing something like this else where. IIRC, the vehicle behind is supposed to is recommended to leave space


So, as long as they are within that they are clear so most likely would be 50/50.
This above deals with vehicles while they are in motion...a stopped vehicle is not in motion. If the first vehicle slips backwards then it could be considered "reverse while unsafe"...I believe that ICBC would likely split the responsibility. A safe driver would not end up too closely behind the 1st vehicle. The road test standard says to stop between 2 and 9 metres behind. If you can just see the bottom of the tyres of the car ahead, you are about 1 car length behind and that would be the minimum distance for me to stop.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-24-2014, 02:32 PM   #9
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
If you feel that the car is too close to avoid rolling back into it, stick your hazards on and wait for the dolt to go around you.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-24-2014, 04:10 PM   #10
Throw yo paws in da air!
 
XplicitLuder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: State of Trance
Posts: 5,032
Thanked 2,721 Times in 934 Posts
^ i was gonna say just wait and signal for him to move the fk back lol
__________________

Proud member of GRAPE Great Revscene Action Photography Enthusiasts


2008 Infiniti M45X - Y50 (Current)
2000 Honda Prelude SH (Sold)
1995 Dodge Spirit (Sold)
1998 Nissan Maxima SE (Sold)
1996 Honda Prelude SR-V (Sold)
XplicitLuder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2014, 05:17 PM   #11
nma
#RVG
 
nma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Richmond
Posts: 557
Thanked 624 Times in 201 Posts
If you use your e-brake, you can virtually have no roll back. It burns your clutch a tiny bit on a steep hill but it's just a few seconds and it's better than hitting someone...

Or spend 30k+ on a car that has hill assist
nma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 08:01 AM   #12
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
ancient_510's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: YVR
Posts: 345
Thanked 206 Times in 109 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
If you feel that the car is too close to avoid rolling back into it, stick your hazards on and wait for the dolt to go around you.
I was honked at yesterday for waiting for rail road crossing gates to go all the way up and the lights to shut off instead of crossing at the earliest possible opportunity (like the lane beside me).

I couldn't imagine having to wait with him on a hill behind me
ancient_510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 08:21 AM   #13
WOAH...shut the music off...
 
GLOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,796
Thanked 4,706 Times in 1,888 Posts
i just think that if they're too close to you the roll back will scare the shit out of them b/c they'll think they're going to get hit
__________________
Feedback
http://www.revscene.net/forums/showthread.php?t=611711

Quote:
Greenstoner
1 rat shit ruins the whole congee
Quote:
[04-06, 11:34]radiomanI'm doing happy hour with bj#3 today
[07-04, 10:27]radiomani need just the tip
[22-12, 08:51]mellomandidnt think and went in straight..scrapped like a bitch
[17-09, 12:07]FastAnna glowjob
[17-09, 12:08]FastAnna I like dat

GLOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 09:05 AM   #14
I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,506
Thanked 102 Times in 61 Posts
If you drive a manual, you should know how to start without rolling back at all. I think you would be at fault or at least 50/50.

I remember one time leaving a car length for a car in front of me on a hill. Just wasn't comfortable with that car for some reason. They ended up rolling back half a car length and then stalling. Then he let go of the brake and tried to turn on his car while rolling back. I honked and they stopped and then turned on the car and tried again and rolled back another half car length. I'm glad there was no one behind me cause I had to let my car roll back another half a car length to not get hit.

Seriously, if you can't start a manual on a hill without rolling back, then don't drive manual. I can start on a steep hill and actually roll back less than some of my friends on an automatic rolls back on that same hill.

If someone's too close, then use your e-brake. There is no excuse for rolling into the person behind you because if you needed to, you have to know how to start without any rollback.
wing_woo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 06:09 PM   #15
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedStars View Post
Hi everyone, not sure if this is the right area to post this but I'm wondering if you roll back (like less than 20cm) on a hill and you hit the car behind you, who would be at fault? Wondering this because I was on a really steep hill and this person behind me would not give me any room at all and I was VERY close to hitting them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
This above deals with vehicles while they are in motion...a stopped vehicle is not in motion. If the first vehicle slips backwards then it could be considered "reverse while unsafe"...I believe that ICBC would likely split the responsibility. A safe driver would not end up too closely behind the 1st vehicle. The road test standard says to stop between 2 and 9 metres behind. If you can just see the bottom of the tyres of the car ahead, you are about 1 car length behind and that would be the minimum distance for me to stop.
20cm is a helluva lot less than "two to nine meters". I've driven automatics that rolled back 20cm or more on a sufficiently steep hill. If the guy behind you stops less than 20cm back, he's WAY WAY TOO CLOSE and I'd be fighting a 50/50 decision all the way to the SCOC.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-25-2014, 06:41 PM   #16
My homepage has been set to RS
 
SpeedStars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,494
Thanked 3,690 Times in 857 Posts
IMG_20140825_184344.jpg
For reference, this is the hill I'm talking about. On the stop sign, there was a few cars so I had to stop and go, but the car behind would keep staying on my ass every single time till I gave them the finger(yes I know, so bad ass) and then made a right turn and carried on. I was probably within an inch of hitting them and they didnt even flinch
__________________
'16 WRX

'93 GSR
SpeedStars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 08:05 AM   #17
RS Veteran
 
Spidey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: vancouver
Posts: 8,773
Thanked 1,264 Times in 617 Posts
they probably don't know why you are fingering them... people are oblivious like that. That hill doesn't even look that bad. It isn't like it is Hastings/Boundary. They probably aren't as close as you think they are either.
Spidey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 08:29 AM   #18
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
BoostedBB6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,796
Thanked 1,831 Times in 587 Posts
I saw a lot of this when I lived in North Vancouver.
With all the hills and people in a rush it was a common thing.
After talking to a number of people who had this happen to them, ICBC said it was the car behind found at fault.

I rang up ICBC and asked about this as I lived on a large hill and was curious. The person I spoke to said that a good rule is, when you come to a top behind another vehicle you should be able to see its tires meeting the road. In most cases this would leave ample room between you and the car in front and allow for roll back of the vehicle in front of you.

A not to those who recommend using the E-brake. This is common practice in most any vehicle I have driven (until I figure out how it handles the hills and such) but one thing I have seen more and more of if the electric e-brakes. With systems like this there is no way to use the e-brake to stop the roll back. Also, any vehicle equipped with a foot operated parking brake is very hard to do this with (but can be done with some ninja moves).
__________________
08' G37S 6MT Coupe - For Sale or Trade (Motorcycle)
05' TL A-Spec
00' Celica GTS
BoostedBB6 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-26-2014, 09:45 AM   #19
Need to Seek Professional Help
 
cruz-in's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,023
Thanked 420 Times in 116 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoostedBB6 View Post

I rang up ICBC and asked about this as I lived on a large hill and was curious. The person I spoke to said that a good rule is, when you come to a top behind another vehicle you should be able to see its tires meeting the road. In most cases this would leave ample room between you and the car in front and allow for roll back of the vehicle in front of you.
THIS.
cruz-in is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 11:02 AM   #20
nuggets mod
 
freakshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: richmond
Posts: 6,702
Thanked 3,045 Times in 840 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedStars View Post
damn, so I guess that as the car in front with the dashcam, it wouldn't make a difference...
Not necessarily.. I imagine that if you had footage and it looked like you rolled back a very very small amount, you could argue that they were way to close to your bumper.
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You

'00 323i (Sold)
'01 Civic Si (Sold)
'95 240sx (Sold)
'02 LMB M5 (Sold)
'92 4Runner (Sold)
'92 Civic VX (Sold)
'03 SL500 (Sold)
'92 NSX
'99 M3 (Totalled)
'07 A4 2.0T (Sold)
'01 CB M5 (Sold)
'01 540i (Sold)
'11 535ix
freakshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 11:02 AM   #21
I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,506
Thanked 102 Times in 61 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoostedBB6 View Post

A not to those who recommend using the E-brake. This is common practice in most any vehicle I have driven (until I figure out how it handles the hills and such) but one thing I have seen more and more of if the electric e-brakes. With systems like this there is no way to use the e-brake to stop the roll back. Also, any vehicle equipped with a foot operated parking brake is very hard to do this with (but can be done with some ninja moves).
I know, but then again, most of those higher end vehicles with electric e-brakes 'should' likely have Hill Start Assist.

I do like the manufacturers that do take manual driving situations into account. Example, an automatic Toyota Camry comes with a foot operated parking brake. However, if you get the same model Camry in manual, it comes with a hand brake instead.

The only manual I've seen that has a foot operated parking brake is the Hummer H3. Guess GM doesn't think everything through or are just too cheap to cater properly to us manual drivers.
wing_woo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 12:13 PM   #22
I don't get it
 
R. Mutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: DT Vancouver
Posts: 433
Thanked 847 Times in 160 Posts
Every once in a while you encounter a dick behind you that loves to stop too close while on a hill. I let the car roll back a few inches to a foot while waiting for the light. It's a subtle was to remind them that cars do roll back as people just assume every car is automatic nowadays. After you do that they tend to leave sufficient room, but I view it as a way of reinforcing good driving one monkey at a time.
R. Mutt is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 08-26-2014, 12:21 PM   #23
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
BoostedBB6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,796
Thanked 1,831 Times in 587 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wing_woo View Post
I know, but then again, most of those higher end vehicles with electric e-brakes 'should' likely have Hill Start Assist.

I do like the manufacturers that do take manual driving situations into account. Example, an automatic Toyota Camry comes with a foot operated parking brake. However, if you get the same model Camry in manual, it comes with a hand brake instead.

The only manual I've seen that has a foot operated parking brake is the Hummer H3. Guess GM doesn't think everything through or are just too cheap to cater properly to us manual drivers.
There are still large numbers of automatic vehicles out there that a brand new that will still roll back if you are not quick enough on the throttle. Auto+electric park brake and slow brake to gas transition will cause it to roll back.
ICBC will often side with the driver in front as there is no way to prove distance and if you simply give the details of the location and the incident they will know exactly what happened.
Seen it so many times in North and West Van.
__________________
08' G37S 6MT Coupe - For Sale or Trade (Motorcycle)
05' TL A-Spec
00' Celica GTS
BoostedBB6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2014, 12:22 PM   #24
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
underscore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Kel-pwn-a
Posts: 11,973
Thanked 4,960 Times in 2,169 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
This above deals with vehicles while they are in motion...a stopped vehicle is not in motion. If the first vehicle slips backwards then it could be considered "reverse while unsafe"...I believe that ICBC would likely split the responsibility. A safe driver would not end up too closely behind the 1st vehicle. The road test standard says to stop between 2 and 9 metres behind. If you can just see the bottom of the tyres of the car ahead, you are about 1 car length behind and that would be the minimum distance for me to stop.
How would ICBC determine the difference between a car rolling back, and a car being rear-ended?
__________________
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S // 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC FOR SALE // 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD

Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer View Post
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp View Post
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa View Post
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
underscore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2014, 10:16 AM   #25
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
BoostedBB6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,796
Thanked 1,831 Times in 587 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by underscore View Post
How would ICBC determine the difference between a car rolling back, and a car being rear-ended?
The drivers stories and any witness that supports the story.
If the driver rolled back and hit a car behind it and claimed they were rear-ended with no witness to say otherwise ICBC sides with the roller and not the person behind them.

Dash cams are a helpful thing in a case like this.
__________________
08' G37S 6MT Coupe - For Sale or Trade (Motorcycle)
05' TL A-Spec
00' Celica GTS
BoostedBB6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net