thread Sorry, I misunderstood
I thought that you had an accident because you were stopped?
permalink The handbrake was on but the engine was running and had a driver
We had stopped not parked.
permalink Ah! So this van has an engine, then?
.......
permalink 4rf
permalink right but I'm with Manley here
why had you pulled over in the first place?
permalink genuinely confused by the chain of events
because as I read it the collision occurred after you stopped because the collision occurred
permalink That is what is confusing me.
It seems that my question was misunderstood, which I have come to learn is nearly always my fault for being a vague arsehole.
permalink I read it as he had stopped, not parked, car behind stopped
and then a second car shunted the other car into his van.
permalink That was my initial reading
but then, when I asked why he had stopped, he said it was because they were involved in a road traffic accident and that's the law.

I am the first to admit that I get all hung up on how I read things and struggle to detangle things.
permalink I like the fact that he clarifies it
as a road traffic accident as opposed to a I've shat myself accident.
permalink First one
then the other
permalink I thought you meant
why did I stop after the accident rather than getting on with my day, sorry.

We were delivering school packs (because a significant number of our families don't have Internet).
permalink Stopped because I needed to shove something through a letter box.
I had got out of the van and closed the door when I heard the first collision (black car hitting the white one), I then turned and saw the white car hit our van.




permalink Now I understand.
Not much to be said - if you drive into the back of a car which safely stopped behind another stopped car then you are 100% culpable.
permalink this
this makes sense