Age Group with the Most Traffic Accidents
Most teenagers behind the wheel don’t recognize hazardous driving conditions, which is why they’re the age group most prone to traffic accidents. Before you hand over your car keys to your teen, it’s crucial to know the facts. Below are some shocking statistics concerning teenage drivers. Teen Driver Statistics The risk of crashing is higher among teens aged 16-19 compared to any other age group. Drivers in this age bracket are three times more likely than drivers aged 20 or older to be in a deadly collision. The following groups are at higher risk for motor vehicle crashes, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC): Teen boys: In 2017, the death rate for male drivers aged 16-19 was three times higher than the death rate for female drivers of a similar age. Newly licensed teens: Collision risk is high during the first few months of obtaining a license. The crash rate per mile driven is 1.5 times higher for 16-year-olds than it is for 19-year-olds. Learn more about the risks associated with teenage traffic accidents. Risk Factors The following are common factors that put teenagers at risk of crashing: Inexperience: Teens are more likely to underestimate dangers compared to seasoned drivers. Moreover, they’re more likely to think they’re invincible, leading to reckless driving. Lack of seat belt use: Compared with other age groups, young adults have the lowest seat belt use rates. Only 59 percent of high school students wear seat belts when riding with passengers, according to the CDC. Speeding: Teens are more likely to drive over the speed limit and allow shorter headways, which is the distance from the front of a car to the front of the next. Alcohol use: According to a national Youth Risk Behavior Survey, 17 percent of high school students admitted to riding with an intoxicated driver within the past month. Among students with a license, six percent admitted to drinking alcohol while driving within the month before the survey. Although drinking alcohol below age 21 is illegal, 15 percent of drivers aged 16-20 involved in fatal collisions had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 percent or higher in the past year. Moreover, 58 percent of drivers aged 15-20 who died in crashes after drinking and driving were not wearing a seat belt. How Can I Keep My Teen Safe? As a parent, you have every right to feel worried about your teen taking on the road; however, you should also be able to trust them. We recommend you do the following: Remind your teen about the dangers of drug and alcohol use. Tell them it’s both illegal and deadly to drink behind the wheel. Since they’re under the legal age, their BAC should always be at .00, not just under .08. Practice safe driving and be an ideal role model for your child. Your son or daughter looks up to you, so it’s essential to always be on your best behavior. Don’t solely rely on a driver’s education class to teach your teen to drive. Set aside time to take them on practice driving sessions. Flickinger Sutterfield & Boulton is Here for You Motor vehicle accidents are never a fun experience, and they can be more disheartening when they involve your children. If your teen was involved in a crash, there’s a possibility it wasn’t their fault. An experienced personal injury attorney from Flickinger Sutterfield & Boulton may be able to prove your child wasn’t negligent, and they may receive compensation. We have offices in Utah and Salt Lake County. Schedule your free case evaluation today.
What Is Comparative Negligence?
When someone is involved in a traffic accident and is injured as a result, deciding who is legally at fault is a strenuous task. There are some accidents where deciding who’s at fault is easy, but this isn’t always the case. In more complex situations where it isn’t clear who’s at fault, comparative negligence comes to play. Comparative Negligence Theories In some states, people who are involved in a car injury split the blame—which means they are splitting the responsibility for paying damages by using comparative negligence theories. These theories state the recovery for damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to them. This situation is usually referred to as “appointment of fault” or “allocation of fault.” Suppose there are two drivers who are involved in a crash. Driver 1 sues driver 2 and claims that they suffered injuries of up to $100,000. The jury finds that driver 1 contributed to the accident by 30% because of their own negligence; the negligence of driver 2 contributes 70% to the accident. If the jury concludes that the injuries are worth $100,000, then driver 1 will only be able to recover $70,000. This instance would be referred to as driver 1 being awarded $100,000 reduced by 30% caused by their own negligence. Conversely, if driver 1’s negligence was found to have contributed to 70% of the accident, then they could only recover $30,000 for the 30% of the fault for which driver 2 is responsible. This particular example would only apply in states that use a “pure” theory of comparative negligence. Some states enforce a modified version of comparative negligence principle, where they only allow a lawsuit if the plaintiff was less than 50% at fault. Modified Comparative Fault The majority of states follow the modified comparative fault model, which is split into two distinct categories: the 50% bar rule and the 51% bar rule. In states that follow the 50% bar rule, which includes Utah, a party that is found 50% or more responsible for an accident may not recover any damages. As for states that follow the 51% rule, a party may not recover damages if he or she is found 51% at fault. Pure Contributory Negligence Certain states recognize a pure contributory negligence rule, where injured parties may not collect damages if they are found as little as one percent to blame for an accident. Only five states follow this legal rule: Alabama, the District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia. Pure Comparative Fault States that recognize the pure comparative fault rule of accident liability allow parties to collect damages, even if they are found 99% at fault. It’s important to note that the degree of damages is limited to the party’s actual degree of fault. If a drunk driver is predominantly to blame for an accident, but they file an injury claim because the other driver had a faulty taillight, he or she may collect a minimal amount of damages. If you were recently injured in a car collision and you’re unsure of what steps to take next, you should start by soliciting the help of an experienced injury lawyer. Contact Flickinger Sutterfield & Boulton today to hold the driver who has injured you accountable.