signdetres

Currently, only the LS500 with the optional “Lexus Safety System+ A” package, with front cross-traffic detection, is capable of identifying and responding to scenarios like these.

songoku

No, I never saw him coming nor thought that there will be a car crossing my way of green light.

It was late at night and the other vehicle was dark color.

azipod

There’s a human factors aspect that we need to consider. You have to understand that we are watching a video while we anticipate an accident. That is not how we drive. want to try a test? Have someone watch the video without telling him or her what the video is about. The most you will get from that person is a “oh ****” literally a second before the crash occurs. That’s how fast these things happen.

Although it’s generally called upon to look before one proceeds into an intersection it doesn’t always apply in every situation nor is it practical in reality. You also have to take into consideration that the camera is mounted at a different perspective than a drivers eye. I know in my car, my wide angle fisheyes lense seems to capture a lot more in a video than my personal field of vision. We also have an A pillar that blocks a lot of our views, the camera does not.

The “but for” argument you are citing is typically used in other scenarios but I would gurantee that a lawyer would **** off a jury by using such argument against the OP. It’s almost as absurd as saying “I ran the redlight and took out your 95 year old father who was walking in a marked crosswalk. He had the green but it’s still his fault because he didn’t walk faster or jump out of the way.”

It will make you look real bad.

bclexus

Would you really guarantee...?

azipod

Yes. Go run the red light and Tbone an innocent motorist like the OP. Then blame the other driver and we”ll talk after you get your verdict from the jury. I would guarantee that I will be there sitting in your trial when the verdict is read. Will be great entertainment (for me).

bclexus

I think you are under the assumption that I am suggesting the person's insurance company that did not have the right-of-way would outright win the case in court. That is not what I'm saying. But I can assure you that with the right law firm and attorneys that the judgement would very likely end up far different than a slam-dunk, which is obviously what you think. Just saying!

azipod

Yes, I agree that anything is possible in life. But that’s not how we make it through each day. In reality, we all make our choices based on probability and likelihood. I am sure you do too.

Here, your suggestion that the OP could be found at fault is a (very very small) possibility, but not very likely.

I wish you would show more empathy for the OP and stop trying to plant a bug in his ear. I think you have a strong opinion on things but you should really think twice before posting here. They teach us at a very young age, if you don’t have anything good to say then don’t say it at all.

bclexus

Once again, you have totally misunderstood what I was attempting to convey to the OP, which was - be careful with that video you (the OP) posted because it could be used against you (meaning the OP), which is something you (the OP) probably haven't even considered. As I stated, that likelihood is practically nil unless there is a major personal injury claim or death, but you never know...

I really do not need you to tell me what to do. I don't need you to tell me what I should do before posting. I have a pretty good idea that I know a tiny bit more than you do about 'such things'. I'll leave it at that!

azipod

Yes. Let’s agree to leave it at that, Mr. Know-it-all.

bclexus

That last comment was unnecessary. Maybe it made you feel good...or something...

azipod

Not really. I rather be your friend. You seem know everything.

bclexus

You have not lost me as a friend. That's your choice if you don't want to be friends. I would gladly accept you as a 'Friend' here on Club Lexus. I'll even initiate the Friend request. I hope you will accept... [azipod added to my Friends list - hope you accept my request.] ✓

PS - Maybe the reason you think I "seem to know everything" (which I do not) is because I do know a lot (but there is a hell of a lot I don't know squat about)...and I am willing to share my knowledge. I hope you don't have a problem with me sharing my knowledge. I'll be the first to say when I'm wrong. I have no problem whatsoever admitting when I am wrong... I enjoy helping others and engaging with others...and that includes you! Let's put this behind us and be friends - that would be so much better for both of us.

DaveGS4

iTrader: (2)

Guys let’s leave off the personal commentary please.

songoku

So if this happened to you and let's say some one got seriously insured.

Then, you would not turn in this dash cam video clearly showing other guys running a red light because of slight chance of this could be used against you?

You rather fight with other insurance company "who ran red lights" battle without any evidence?

bclexus

Is the other party not taking responsibility for the accident? Hopefully he will, then there won't be any need to share the dash cam video.

If the other party doesn't take full responsibility for the accident I personally would provide the video to my attorney(s) and let them and my insurance company make the decision on whether it be used as evidence. Chances are this claim will be handled quickly and without backlash...and no need for you to have an attorney. But...

All I am saying is that if the video is used as evidence it would become part of the discovery procedure and the other side could see it as useful to them - which gets to the possibility that the video could be used against you (the OP). Much stranger things have happened than for someone to think they were totally innocent and the subject of someone else's improper behavior to low-and-behold be found partially responsible...or even solely responsible. You throw in some witnesses, some attorneys, a judge and a jury...[and a video] - and you never know what might happen! Hello O.J. Simpson!

Much more likely in a property damage only claim like this without injuries would be for just one side to take full responsibility for the accident. But, you never know when an insurance company might want to litigate if they see a reasonable opening (e.g. the video) to reduce the damages. If they can halve the damages, that's a success. Or maybe someone claims injury late in the process, which can change things - then things can turn on a dime and the move will be to have both parties take some responsibility (e.g. 50/50) instead of all the responsibility put on one party. You never know how a judge or jury will decide such things, until they do.

All different kinds of things can surface when you least expect it when a costly traffic accident happens, unfortunately it usually comes down to the money - saving money that would otherwise be paid out by an insurance company. Things that can throw a monkey wrench into things quickly is an uninsured motorist, not enough insurance coverage, late claims of injury, duty to render aid and the possible consequences of that action, etc., etc., etc.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here is an example of what different parties go through and consider when a serious accident happens, usually involving serious injuries or death. The case is Spencer v. Liberty Mutual Insurance. It's a long read, but nevertheless interesting to learn the strategy when it comes to passing the blame to others, including innocent parties.