Sorry Martin but I am baffled,
If you hit a car from behind then you are at fault,I am not a lawyer , but I cannot think of many situations where you could not be found at fault.
I mean, if this lady stopped, for any reason rather than run the light then the deterrent is working right?you even say that you agent said that minor bumps are up , does that mean deaths and serious injuries are down?
Then you say...
..you hit a car that had a history of slamming on brakes at lights soon to turn red and that she was phobic about cams and getting even more tickets; then that after you hit her car she admitted to witnesses that she has done this many times before and made statements to confirm this; then ,that you called the police, ( not her!) to make sure you could not be held at fault.
After all of this, and some days later, your insurance agent discussed with you her driving history and insurance claims records with you.
Really?
Hmm, sorry, I do not buy this story, nor do I see how you can hit a car with a Ford F350 and it is like a butterfly kiss and just a tap, as you say maybe you "did get lucky and it's just a scratch".
Does any one happen to know if cams at lights have cut down on serious injury with the trade off of minor accidents,or is it just yet another large source of revenue location like most cams on speeding ticket $ spots.
Lights and intersections of any kind being run scare me more than anything else on the road .
PS, Martin, in earlier posts:
did you not talk about a flux capacitor magnet that you carry in your car that alerts the lights to when you are there and makes them change them quicker ?