Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who is at fault for this accident? With diagram

139 replies

NeighbourHitMyCar · 20/09/2024 21:09

Hi there!

I'm not going to do those annoying Driver A and Driver B posts.... My neighbour hit the front side of my car while reversing out of their driveway

We have had previous issues with them regarding a skip that was in front of our house and damage to our driveway from the skip lorry taking out a wall so there is history there!!

However, their insurers are now trying to say the accident was 50:50 my fault too and i just can't see how!

I was returning home after work and drove along my road and slightly passed my house. There was no traffic coming either way so I pulled across the road onto the other side slightly to line up the car (our driveway parking is at an angle due to a tree).

I had stopped the car and and put it into reverse when...BANG... I turned to see my neighbours car bonnet at my driver door having dented it.

They park forward into their driveway which means they have to reverse out. They had obviously seen no traffic was coming along the road and not looked directly behind them to see me already in the road.

Hope the dodgy diagram makes sense

Can anyone explain how their insurers are possibly claiming I am in any way at fault here?

Feel like I'm going mad having sent diagram after diagram

Unfortunately no ring footage or dashcam

Who is at fault for this accident? With diagram
OP posts:
nutrosti · 21/09/2024 10:57

Pulling up and reversing

**The examiner is looking for 3 different skills when you perform this manoeuvre:

  1. Control – slow and steady does it!
  2. Accuracy – make sure you demonstrate good road positioning
  3. Observation – Don’t forget your routine - Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre or Look Tell Do!

www.wearemarmalade.co.uk/driver-hub/learner-advice/driving-practice/detail/pulling-up-on-the-right-and-reversing

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 10:42

NeighbourHitMyCar · 21/09/2024 08:13

@Freysimo I do have legal cover but I've gone back to my insurers to say I don't believe it should be 50:50 which they agree with so will see what happens after pushing back. I'm hoping this might be as other posters suggest and a mere 'try for' by the other side

but you said your insurer has asked for “physical evidence”… are you able to provide any?

PeacefulEnjoyment · 21/09/2024 08:55

NotOnlyFedUpButAlso · 20/09/2024 21:52

What I was tyring to say above is that I don't think it even matters if you were moving or stationary, you were manoevering in the public highway in an entirely legal way, and he drove out of his drive and drove into you while you were doing so. It can't be your fault, otherwise we'd all have to stop and get out and look around every corner to see what might be coming!

Exactly this.

Just for a moment, switch your car (whether stationary or moving backward or forward to get into your drive) for a moving pedestrian.

Are we to say because the pedestrian is crossing they are at fault of being reversed into?

This is exactly why the Highway Code says people shouldn't reverse into a road! You were obeying the Highway Code by reversing into your drive to comply with the Highway Code and prevent exactly what your neighbour did. It's impossible to reverse into your driveway without moving! So whether you were moving or not is irrelevant.

Had your neighbour been in the road BEFORE you started your manoeuvre, you'd have been at fault. But it would be impossible for him to clip your car if you were not already halfway through your very legal manoeuvre.

They're trying it on.

SinnerBoy · 21/09/2024 08:51

nutrosti · Today 07:53

you would be failed in a driving test if your manoeuvre involved being on the other side of the road.

That's arrant nonsense and she explained that the road is too narrow for two cars to pass.

Dilbertian · 21/09/2024 08:39

NeighbourHitMyCar · 20/09/2024 21:22

@FairFuming my insurers are in negotiations with their insurers and have just asked for as much information as possible as they are not accepting full liability.

I've just actually read the letter in full and they are stating I wasn't stationery. Which I was!

Not sure how to argue that as to me it seems to be a moot point as I was 'mid manoeuvre' as a poster pointed out and already occupying the road

I was stationary, waiting to turn left at a give way, when the car behind crashed into me.

My insurers said it was straightforward his responsibility, but then went 50:50 when he claimed I had rolled back. They said that as there was no independent evidence it was my word against his, ie unverifiable.

I imagine that's what's happened here: your word that you were stationary against his that you were reversing.

I bought a dashcam.

Original poster
NeighbourHitMyCar · 21/09/2024 08:13

@Freysimo I do have legal cover but I've gone back to my insurers to say I don't believe it should be 50:50 which they agree with so will see what happens after pushing back. I'm hoping this might be as other posters suggest and a mere 'try for' by the other side

OP posts:
Freysimo · 21/09/2024 08:06

NeighbourHitMyCar · 21/09/2024 07:10

I'm actually reassured to read from so many that 50:50 seems to be the default starting position. But so many people have to accept that when they weren't even in the car at the time 😮

Do you have legal cover on your insurance? Someone dented my car when she joined a roundabout I was already on. Her insurance tried to make it 50-50 but I refused and legal cover sorted it.

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 08:04

Jobs4kids · 21/09/2024 08:01

Years ago I was driving along a road and a car reversed out of their driveway straight into me. There was never any question that it wasn't her fault. Having said that she admitted it immediately, apologised and said she hadn't seen me so cut and dried. Sounds like your neighbour is trying to get out of if. As you weren't even moving (unlike me) I can't see how you can be at fault!

because… the op was substantially on the other side of the road!! You weren’t

Jobs4kids · 21/09/2024 08:01

Years ago I was driving along a road and a car reversed out of their driveway straight into me. There was never any question that it wasn't her fault. Having said that she admitted it immediately, apologised and said she hadn't seen me so cut and dried. Sounds like your neighbour is trying to get out of if. As you weren't even moving (unlike me) I can't see how you can be at fault!

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 07:55

but arguing that you were stationary in the middle of road, substantially on the other side of the road…. is not exactly a compelling argument!

AhBiscuits · 21/09/2024 07:53

This is a classic he said she said 50/50.
You'll never prove you hadn't driven into the path of his reversing vehicle.
Two manoeuvring cars, no actual evidence of what happened.

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 07:53

you would be failed in a driving test if your manoeuvre involved being on the other side of the road.
Fact

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 07:52

SinnerBoy · 21/09/2024 07:50

nutrosti · Yesterday 21:14

you were on the other side of the road partly

Drivers are entitled to complete their manoeuvre and a driver coming out should wait. As mentioned, the onus is on the reversing driver to take extra care, looking for obstructions, such as pedestrians and other cars.

The neighbour is unambiguously at fault here.

we will agree to disagree

Zonder · 21/09/2024 07:51

I would want to remind them to reverse in. I never understand why people don't. I reverse into all spaces - much easier to reverse into a Sainsbury's car park space and come out forward than the other way round where you have to keep looking for cars coming.

SinnerBoy · 21/09/2024 07:50

nutrosti · Yesterday 21:14

you were on the other side of the road partly

Drivers are entitled to complete their manoeuvre and a driver coming out should wait. As mentioned, the onus is on the reversing driver to take extra care, looking for obstructions, such as pedestrians and other cars.

The neighbour is unambiguously at fault here.

Chester23 · 21/09/2024 07:23

How did they check the road was clear before proceeding to reverse off their drive if your car was already there? Surely they would have seen your car if you was in that position?

Original poster
NeighbourHitMyCar · 21/09/2024 07:12

lanthanum · 20/09/2024 23:24

His mistake. It's a very understandable one - presumably he saw your car go past, and assumed it was gone, not thinking of the possibility that the car would be stopping to make a manoeuvre. However that doesn't make you culpable - it was still his error.

This is exactly what I think happened

We have had to beep at them 3/4 times before where they've reversed out and nearly hit us or another car.

They said after this they'd start reversing INTO their drive from now on but it's currently sitting there forward in so that didn't last very long

OP posts:
Original poster
NeighbourHitMyCar · 21/09/2024 07:10

I'm actually reassured to read from so many that 50:50 seems to be the default starting position. But so many people have to accept that when they weren't even in the car at the time 😮

OP posts:
nutrosti · 21/09/2024 06:35

NeighbourHitMyCar · 20/09/2024 21:38

If anyone has ring video footage or dashcam as I said above

presumably this happened quite some time ago if you car is fully repaired and the insurer now has the garage photos and all details to be arguing 50/50?

surely the dashcam will show in stationary in the road, quite significantly positioned on a part of the road where you shouldn’t have been

and if only stationary for “2 seconds” as you say… this could well appear on a dash am from some distance away that you were slow moving

nutrosti · 21/09/2024 06:32

Ohnobackagain · 20/09/2024 23:06

@NeighbourHitMyCar definitely go back and tell insurer you were stationary

Edited

stationary
but….
in the middle of the road and indeed on the other side of the road. The part of the road that he was entitled to be on when he reversed in to the Op’s boot.

IMO this is 50/50

In any event, it will go to 50/50 unless the Op produces “physical evidence” to indicate otherwise, which i’m presuming is absent.

Soontobe60 · 21/09/2024 06:14

Hazeby · 20/09/2024 21:38

I think if you’re reversing it’s almost always your fault because you should be looking at where you’re reversing?

Both of them were reversing though

supersop60 · 21/09/2024 05:39

Zonder · 20/09/2024 23:33

Because you're reversing into a public highway and it's dangerous. Your back end is sticking out before you can get a good view. It's much safer to reverse into an empty space and come forwards into the road.

Show quote history

Yes, I know that, but in the Highway Code it doesn't say y'ou must not'. So in OP's case, the reversing in itself is not wrong.
However, for the neighbour to hit the side of OPs car, then OP must have been stationary or barely moving.

Zonder · 20/09/2024 23:33

supersop60 · 20/09/2024 23:13

Why can't you reverse off a driveway?

Show quote history

Because you're reversing into a public highway and it's dangerous. Your back end is sticking out before you can get a good view. It's much safer to reverse into an empty space and come forwards into the road.

lanthanum · 20/09/2024 23:24

His mistake. It's a very understandable one - presumably he saw your car go past, and assumed it was gone, not thinking of the possibility that the car would be stopping to make a manoeuvre. However that doesn't make you culpable - it was still his error.

supersop60 · 20/09/2024 23:13

DecayedStrumpet · 20/09/2024 21:17

You were stationary? Not your fault.
Obviously the insurers are going to try and get away with paying as little as possible.

Bonus points - reversing off the driveway is against the Highway Code - for exactly this reason! - so your neighbour has that as a strike against them as well

Why can't you reverse off a driveway?