If I someone were to slam on the brakes in front of me on a steep freeway going down hill at 70 mph who would be at fault?

Other answer:

bob:
You would be because you were not following at a safe distance. A safe driver must ALWAYS expect the unexpected. Drive as if every person out there is a total moron and is going to do something really stupid at any moment and you will have a much better chance of being accident free. I won't say you can't be in an accident, because there is always the moron who you can't avoid because he (or she) aims at you and you just can't escape.

Do a search for "suicide by truck" and you'll find morons who want to commit suicide, so they drive at high speed down a non-divided highway and at the last second swerve into a head on collision with a heavy truck going the opposite direction. There is not sufficient time for the truck to evade, or even slow. Now consider the poor trucker (if he/she survives) having to live with that the rest of his/her life!

StephenWeinstein:
You are. You are never, ever, under any circumstances, allowed to drive so close to the car in front of you that you won't be able to stop in time if they slam on their brakes.

There are many situations in which a person is supposed to slam on their brakes — and none in which you are allowed to be close enough so that they can't slam on their brakes safely.

FlagMichael:
Amazing how many people don't understand that causing an accident is illegal. If the driver of the front car had a reason to brake hard, it is all on you. If not, it is all on them, and can result in a felony charge against them. See the source.
Snippeh:
You would be. The car in front might slam on the brakes for any reason, at any time. It's up to you to make sure the distance between yourself and the car in front is big enough to allow you to stop before hitting them.
Bertsta:
The guy behind is responsible because it you should anticipate that a car in front may have to make an emergency stop, and if you can't see what is happening ahead, and be able to react, then you are too close.
STEPHEN:
Who would be at fault for what? You haven't said anything happened.
If you went into the back of them you'd be at fault for being too close.
NavyCrab:
It is still your fault for following too closely (assuming that 70 mph is the speed limit).
Skoda John:
You have no idea what they have seen otmr had a problem with.
I have seen a transmission fail locked at 70MPH. In this case no brake lights came on.
Always keep your distance.
g:
You are still at fault, Bob, you need to realize that fact. You simply failed to maintain a proper distance to stop. It's all on you.
Michael:
for what? If you were crashed? You would be 100% for following too close.

Leave a Reply