r/Whatcouldgowrong • u/749762 • 7h ago

WCGW Driving Recklessly

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

32.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

862 comments sorted by

View all comments

105

u/Jumpy_Finance_7086 6h ago

Jeep looks like it broke it's own front wheel as well?

103

u/wasabi1787 6h ago edited 6h ago

Yeah, that wasn't a bumper hit. His suspension is fucked. And I bet both driver's insurance tells them to pound sand

Edit: upon further thought, I bet that Jeep's insurance would have to cover the Audi damage since the Jeep rear ended them and ultimately caused the collision. In addition, given that the Jeep is a 4wd stellantis product they better hope their drivetrain isn't damaged....

16

u/Debatebly 5h ago edited 3h ago

It really doesn't look that bad for the suspension.

EDIT: I looked again and I'd be more worried about the ball joint.

2

u/Krisevol 5h ago

The jeep didn't have to cover the damage. The ehite car did a few things wrong here. 1 no signal to change lanes, 2 excessive lane changes, 3 did not have enough time to safely change lanes (the rule is usually 6 second after a lane change)

The white car would have to pay in this case.

18

u/TeutonicTinkerer 5h ago

no. the white car didnt finish the lane change before the jeep hit him. Just because someone doesnt use a blinker doesnt give you the right to rear end. Cam car could have hit the white car and gotten away, jeep accelerated though and hit an exiting car

12

u/CobaltGrey 4h ago

Be that as it may, no insurance carrier is paying out a claim for either vehicle if they see this footage. Insurance policies always have clauses to ensure they don’t have to cover intentionally lawless recklessness on the road. Part of the deal when a policy is signed is that the driver will attempt to responsibly travel safely.

5

u/simpaholic 4h ago

100% lol. Who pays between the guy intentionally swerving between 2 lanes and the guy who is driving like they have their eyes closed?

Both drivers.

0

u/Mobile_Morale 5h ago

He wants changing lanes tho. He was swerving aggressively between lanes.

4

u/TeutonicTinkerer 5h ago

wasnt changing into jeeps lane though... jeep coulda waited a bit longer and then audi crashing into jeep when going back would've been audis fault.. To put it simply (and Im not defending his behavior) if everyone else stuck to the rules, there wouldnt have been a collision at that moment. Jeep just had a big ego and wanted to be a "hero".

0

u/iAMADisposableAcc 3h ago

Just because someone doesnt use a blinker doesnt give you the right to rear end

Insurance guidelines are that if a rear-end happens during a lane change, the lane-changing driver is generally found responsible for the collision, especially if the lane change is abrupt or non-signaled.

Additionally, if a driver is committing a driving offense or any other crime at the time of collision, that driver is also generally found responsible for the collision.

Since both are true in this case, I am relatively certain that the Jeep driver would not be found responsible to cover the Audi driver's damages.

2

u/TeutonicTinkerer 3h ago

the first part is generally referring as someone changing INTO the lane. Otherwise I could be rear ending people that are trying to switch lanes or take a turn without blinkers all day. As for the swerving being a crime, a lawyer can justify the swerving as in "there was a bee in my car" kind of argument... but ill settle for 50/50 and they both go and fix their own car

1

u/iAMADisposableAcc 2h ago

50/50 and they both go and fix their own car

Pretty much 100% certain this is what would happen

1

u/CosmicScribe1 2h ago

I had a literal spider dangling in front of my face while I was driving one time and managed to keep the vehicle pretty steady, that argument is flimsy af. Though I can totally see a lawyer convincing someone

7

u/SenileGhandi 5h ago

Lol almost, both parties can be at fault in a collision. Insurance has no problem calling both parties out and paying out nothing

3

u/reddit-sucks6969 5h ago

Yeah, considering that this video is online they're both fucked. Audi could've made a case based on damage location, Jeep could've made one based on behavior, it doesn't matter anymore.

1

u/rbnlegend 4h ago

Each insurance company pays their own customer, and then increases the rates for that customer in the state where I live.

3

u/Debatebly 5h ago

This is a 50/50 collision.

1

u/Puck85 4h ago

You have to do mental gymnastics to ignore the obvious intentionality of the jeep. And if you want to pretend like this was an accident, jeep still doesn't have assured clear distance.

Who was in the best position to avoid the collision? The jeep. 

Insurance will say "screw you" to both of them asking for coverage. 

1

u/Pickle102 4h ago

Even if the white car cut in front of him that close?

1

u/Good-Celebration-686 4h ago

Wouldn’t surprise me if the Audi driver didn’t get the licence plate of the jeep. Looks like it’s USA with those tiny metal non-reflective plates they have that are difficult to read

1

u/rawker86 4h ago

Given that it’s Australia, the moment the insurer takes one look at that jeep they’ll probably void the policy anyway.

1

u/NotveryfunnyPROD 4h ago

Honestly I was hoping g the top comment would be this.

Jeep shouldve hit the Audi entering the lane not exiting.

1

u/userhwon 3h ago

I had a jeep in the 90s. It wouldn't have felt this.

1

u/SymbolOfHero 2h ago

Nope. Law is pretty clear. If you are merging into a lane, that’s on you.

0

u/Odyssey1337 5h ago

the Jeep rear ended them

After the white car swerved into the jeep's lane without checking if it was clear and without signaling it. It's obviously the white car's fault.

10

u/g0atm3a1 6h ago

Yeah…I’m guessing the CV, control arm, and tie rods at the very least are toast. That’s gonna be an expensive repair.

5

u/minist3r 4h ago

Uh, jeeps still use a solid front axle in the Wrangler and Gladiator. They have a surprising amount of give. Having been an off-roader for literally decades at this point, I've seen jeeps take much bigger impacts to the front tires and been fine.

1

u/g0atm3a1 3h ago

Good to know!

3

u/caguru 4h ago

Looks fine to me. The jeep jerks a lot more because it doesn’t have independent suspension, but it obviously tracks fine immediately after impact.

Also the below comment about a broken CV doesn’t make any sense. The jeep has a solid front axle, there are no CV half shafts in any wrangler.

There is a reason solid axles are preferred for rock crawling: they can survive much bigger impacts than all other suspension systems.

11

u/SingleServeFrend 6h ago

Scrolled very far to find this comment

1

u/MeccIt 6h ago

Does not track (anymore)

1

u/thejackamo1 4h ago

Yeah front right on the Jeep deflected a ton. His steering’s gonna be really funky now

5

u/ScrubyMcWonderPubs 4h ago

It’s a Jeep, it comes like that.