Jump to content
rotjohns

Pace Bus Accidents

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Pace831 said:

 Approximate address was 1501 E 103rd, or here, so you are correct the bus was turning into the southbound ramp.

I figured that the ABC7 story was wrong, in that Woodlawn doesn't even go south there. Obviously it was a 353 doing as what you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Busjack said:

I figured that the ABC7 story was wrong, in that Woodlawn doesn't even go south there. Obviously it was a 353 doing as what you said.

Woodlawn does go south from 103rd. It turns into Doty Av, which is the frontage road along the Bishop Ford that goes to Walmart. But we are in agreement that the accident didn’t happen there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most likely scenario is Pace driver underestimated how fast CTA was going and how fast his bus could accelerate from a stop, CTA driver did not expect Pace to turn in front of him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

Most likely scenario is Pace driver underestimated how fast CTA was going and how fast his bus could accelerate from a stop, CTA driver did not expect Pace to turn in front of him. 

Unless the Pace bus was in reverse and the driver was not using the backup cam, the usual presumption is that if you are rear ended, the other driver is at fault. Pace driver was supposed to take the turn onto the ramp at 53 mph?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Busjack said:

Unless the Pace bus was in reverse and the driver was not using the backup cam, the usual presumption is that if you are rear ended, the other driver is at fault. Pace driver was supposed to take the turn onto the ramp at 53 mph?

The bus wasn't "rear ended" in the usual sense. They were traveling opposite directions when the Pace bus turned across the path of the CTA bus, and the impact was to the rear of the Pace bus as it was nearing the end of its turn. There could easily have been a dispute over whether Pace turned unsafely or CTA ran the red light, which might explain why no citations were issued. The crash report has the primary cause listed as "UNABLE TO DETERMINE". There's not enough information for us to determine who was at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pace831 said:

The bus wasn't "rear ended" in the usual sense. They were traveling opposite directions when the Pace bus turned across the path of the CTA bus, and the impact was to the rear of the Pace bus at the end of the turn. There could easily have been a dispute over whether Pace turned unsafely or CTA ran the red light, which might explain why no citations were issued. The crash report has the primary cause listed as "UNABLE TO DETERMINE". There's not enough information for us to determine who was at fault.

Like I said earlier, the dashcam could tell us, not that the agencies would divulge anything.  I would expect both agencies to be sued in court for unsafe actions contributing to this accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Pace831 said:

The bus wasn't "rear ended" in the usual sense. They were traveling opposite directions when the Pace bus turned across the path of the CTA bus, and the impact was to the rear of the Pace bus as it was nearing the end of its turn. There could easily have been a dispute over whether Pace turned unsafely or CTA ran the red light, which might explain why no citations were issued. The crash report has the primary cause listed as "UNABLE TO DETERMINE". There's not enough information for us to determine who was at fault.

So your saying the #353 does a 180 there? If it did a 90 it would have side impact damage. Regardless the bus was rear ended and will be viewed as the fault of the striker. The CTA bus was obviously driving too fast for conditions if the road was slick it's still the strikers fault. No citations were probably not issued due to blaming road conditions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Pace831 said:

The crash report has the primary cause listed as "UNABLE TO DETERMINE".

That's because the police report is inadmissible hearsay if the cop was not there at the moment of the collision. It only provides proof that the accident was reported and forms for reporting it to the Secretary of State. You're putting too much into it.

14 hours ago, artthouwill said:

 I would expect both agencies to be sued in court for unsafe actions contributing to this accident.

If you mean by the passengers, sure, as the lawyers will join anyone potentially liable.

There probably will be an intergovernmental agreement between CTA and Pace settling the property damage, again not including an admission of liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BusHunter said:

So your saying the #353 does a 180 there? If it did a 90 it would have side impact damage. Regardless the bus was rear ended and will be viewed as the fault of the striker. The CTA bus was obviously driving too fast for conditions if the road was slick it's still the strikers fault. No citations were probably not issued due to blaming road conditions.

A rear end accident is when some hits another vehicle in the rear end.  What happened here was a t - bone, although it was toward the rear of the bus, it was still a SIDE impact, not a rear end.  This is why no citation was issued.

CTA could possibly charge their driver with a preventable accident which means the driver didn't do something(s) that could prevented the accident from happening. 

Pace probably will charge their driver with a preventable accident. 

Most companies will fire you for 3 preventable accidents in a  twelve month period.  However., when there's major damage, injuries, or fatalities involved,  a company  or agency can move fire a person  based only on that accident.   Some even fire drivers for one thing minor preventable if the driver is in a probationary period .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BusHunter said:

So your saying the #353 does a 180 there? If it did a 90 it would have side impact damage. Regardless the bus was rear ended and will be viewed as the fault of the striker. The CTA bus was obviously driving too fast for conditions if the road was slick it's still the strikers fault. No citations were probably not issued due to blaming road conditions.

5bfd9d34ddf32_buscrash103.thumb.png.5b7f1d3d707492be9cbfd3640963a286.png

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

That's because the police report is inadmissible hearsay if the cop was not there at the moment of the collision. It only provides proof that the accident was reported and forms for reporting it to the Secretary of State. You're putting too much into it.

The part you quoted wasn't intended to prove anything in the previous sentences, it was only to show that those of us on this forum aren't able to tell who is at fault. The officer(s) on scene couldn't easily tell what the primary cause was, so we can't either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pace831 said:

5bfd9d34ddf32_buscrash103.thumb.png.5b7f1d3d707492be9cbfd3640963a286.png

 

If this is the correct representation of what happened, the ABC7 statement that the buses were  operating in opposite directions  at the time of the collision was somewhere between mortadella and doktorskaya. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×