IS it true that it is always the car behinds

[stillshaking]

Here's the scenario
Car A, in front, effectively does an emergency stop, for no apparent reason.
Car b, behind, hits car A.
more damage to car B than car A.

title is meant to say "fault" at the end....

You should always have enough space between you and the car in front, so that you have time to stop safely if the front car does have to do an emergency stop. So (unless there was other stuff going on) Car B is responsible - if you think Car A did it for no reason, then you might try arguing the case, but essentially you were driving too close (what if there had been a good reason?) That's my understanding of it anyway, you should really talk to your insurance company.

It is the car behinds fault yes - it should have been travelling far enough back to be able to execute an emergency stop of it's own. I was crashed into on a roundabout during a driving lesson because I stopped suddenly (far too suddenly) when the lights turned orange. Fortunately there was no damage to my car and very little to the car behind because I would have felt awful to have caused someone else to have to claim on tehir insurance for soemthing taht was morally, if not legally, my fault.

yes think that's right, my neighbour did alot of damage to his car when this happened to him.

what if car A admits it wasn't an emergency stop, but says foot slipped/brakes seized etc...

Yes it is.

It is a bit of the law well known to be misused.

talk to your insurer not sure what happens then

If insured driver in Car A wants to admit liability and put it in writing to both insurance companies involved then it might be different.

Hence you never admit liability at the roadside.

dh says car bs fault.
they will say car b was not reading the road/traffic properly and must have been following too closely.

Still car b's fault - shoudl have been a safe distance away. so come on - are you A or B?

Usually car behind but can be rare exceptions. If exactly as you describe then was car behind. Very difficult for back car to establish that it was partly front car's fault but occasionally possible.

We got caught like this, someone shunted DH into a car in stationary traffic & then drove off. DH had to claim for our car & the one in front claimed us too. He really couldn't have done anything as he was at least a car length away but stopped as was car in front. On motorway so no handbrake on as traffic start stop for quite a distance. He was at the back of that particular lane, nutter in a Saab came flying along straight into him at about 50 mph. They screeched on the hard shoulder & flew off at junction just along the road. Several witnesses gave their names but Insurers said they could only claim on DH as no-one had other drivers details.

A lorry once reversed into the front of my car. Dh was really worried in case he claimed I drove into the back of him. Fortunately he wasn't the one having to pay so he 'fessed up. Well, either that or he may have been too stupid to work it out. That's a distinct possibility, given the circumstances (he was trying to reverse off an exit road back onto a 3 lane A road when I inadvertently got in his way).

I'm sure (well, I'm not but) that it doesn't matter if you confess at the roadside. Think this is disregarded as heat of the moment stuff.