On December 19, a traffic accident in Hefei, Anhui Province** was widely circulated on the Internet, which aroused the attention and heated discussions of netizens. In this accident, an elderly man riding an electric bicycle was driving in the wrong direction and accidentally fell in front of a black SUV vehicle that was turning right normally. After investigation, the black SUV driver was found to be secondarily responsible for the accident.
Among them, the staff of the traffic police department in the jurisdiction said that traffic accidents do not necessarily require physical physical contact to occur, and specific cases need to be determined by the traffic police according to the specific situation.
According to the surveillance**, at the T-shaped intersection in Hefei City, a black SUV slowed down and turned right, at this time an elderly man riding an electric bicycle in the opposite direction, and then fell in front of the black SUV. After the accident, the family of the black SUV posted, "The driver drove to the right normally, saw the old man falling, did not drive away directly, and kindly came down to help the old man, but the other party still asked my son to be responsible, what a joke." ”
After the accident, the driver of the black SUV took the initiative to get out of the car to help the old man, but he didn't expect to do a bad thing with good intentions: the old man's family wanted her son to take responsibility and pay part of the cost of the operation. In this regard, the staff of the traffic police department in the jurisdiction said that traffic accidents do not necessarily require physical physical contact to occur, and specific cases need to be determined by the traffic police according to the specific circumstances.
This incident has aroused widespread attention and discussion among netizens, some people think that the driver of the black SUV should not be held responsible, because he was driving normally, one did not speed, two did not drive the high beam, three did not stop and lean indiscriminately, and the old man fell down in the wrong direction, and the driver was judged to be responsible for the "big injustice".
So how should the law determine liability for such non-contact accidents?
According to Article 119 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, a traffic accident refers to an incident in which a vehicle suffers personal or property damage due to fault or accident on the road. It can be seen that the law does not limit traffic accidents to the scope of contact collisions, and traffic accidents can also occur without contact and collisions, resulting in the issue of liability.
First of all, we need to make it clear that the definition of a traffic accident is not limited to contact collisions between vehicles. In many cases, traffic accidents may not involve direct contact collisions, but they can still cause damage to people's lives and property. For example, on a highway, a car suddenly loses control and crashes into a guardrail next to it, which does not result in a contact collision with other vehicles, but still constitutes a traffic accident.
At the same time, according to Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, it is also stipulated that if a motor vehicle causes physical and property damage in a traffic accident, the insurance company shall compensate within the limit of the compulsory insurance liability of the third party liability of the motor vehicle. The insufficient part shall be liable for compensation in accordance with the following provisions: if a traffic accident occurs between a motor vehicle and a non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian, and the non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian is not at fault, the motor vehicle party shall be liable for compensation;If there is evidence to prove that the driver or pedestrian of the non-motor vehicle is at fault, the liability of the motor vehicle party shall be appropriately reduced according to the degree of fault;If the motor vehicle party is not at fault, it shall bear no more than 10% of the liability for compensation.
Based on the above provisions, it is reasonable for the black SUV vehicle to be held liable for this non-contact accident. Although the vehicle is not at fault, it is still liable for no more than ten percent of the damages according to the relevant legal provisions.
To be clear, a no-contact accident is one in which the vehicles of both parties did not have direct contact during the accident, but still caused damage. In this case, the determination of liability often needs to consider factors such as the driving status of the vehicles of both parties at the time of the accident, the compliance with traffic rules, etc.
Of course, from a sentimental point of view, black SUV owners are indeed a bit unlucky. They are non-violatory, illegal, but need to be responsible, which is unacceptable to most people. And this punishment may also make many people remain indifferent in the face of such incidents. But from a rational point of view, we also need to recognize that the occurrence of traffic accidents often involves many factors.
To sum up, although black SUV owners have become a "big wrongdoer", we also need to think about the problem from a rational perspective. It is necessary to recognize that the determination of liability and compensation for traffic accidents are carried out in accordance with the law, and strengthening the publicity and education of traffic laws and regulations is also an important measure to reduce traffic accidents.