Who is at fault for this accident? With diagram

Insurance companies always try to go 50/50 at first, definitely don't accept it. This happened to my husband, he was driving slowly, in a straight line, on the right side of the road, in a car park. A car reversed out of a parking space straight into the side of his car. Their insurance still tried for 50/50.

Contact an accident management company. They're really good in a no fault claim. They will handle all the aggro, and get your car repaired while providing you with a courtesy car in the meantime.

They also provide legal advice including a barrister should it go to court.

I had turned left at a junction, when I noticed two elderly people with sticks trying to cross the road, so I stopped to let them go. This dickhead came in from the right, and just as I was about to move off, he tried to pass me on the driver's side and hit my car.

All apologies at the scene and it was all his fault, until the insurance co got involved. Took it all the way to court insisting on 50-50 but I held firm. The court overran on time so my case wasn't heard but my barrister came and asked whether I would accept any liability as the other side wanted to settle. I said, "no, absolutely not" - barrister actually high-fived me and soon after came back to say that the insurance company had accepted full liability!

Best of all, it cost me nothing.

A good broker will handle your claim too. That's part of the service.

But they were reversing in the same direction so if the OP was reversing at the time she would have been reversing away from the other car.

Neighbour responsible because they're reversed onto a road and hit a vehicle that was already on the road.

Because you were both manoeuvring neither had right of way and neither were paying due care and attention. Had a similar one years ago. I fought it and won so push back.

Genuine question: how does an insurance broker help with insurance claims?IME they help find insurers, they don't have anything to dowith claims. Am I wrong?

I was in an accident last year on a narrow lane where there wasn't space to pass another car. Another car travelling way too fast couldn't stop after coming around a blind corner, I stopped in time but he couldn't. He admitted liability at the scene. Skid marks and a BT box he hit showed he was going ridiculously fast. But no witnesses or dash cam so insurance went 50/50. His story was that I was too far to the right coming round the corner. A basic check of the photographic evidence would have demonstrated the accident happened on single width bit of road. So the only relevant factor was speed. 100% his fault but insurance couldn't care less.

I always thought if you hit a stationary car you are at fault so I would say your neighbour is at fault. He should have been looking in his rear view mirror when reversing - obviously wasn’t. You could have stopped for various reasons so I don’t see why you should be to blame

Don't let it. Especially with the highway code rules that you shouldn't reverse into the carriageway (check that, I'm vaguely quoting a PP but you know it makes sense). Why do you reverse into your drive? Might it feel more safe? Stand your ground; I really hope you get this sorted fast.

What I really want to know is if your car had been a person, even though they shouldn't have been there, who's fault would it have been then? No amount of flowers would excuse that. They need to know where they're putting the car they're in control of.

I had something similar, where somebody reversed into me as I was inching forward into my dedicated (work related) parking space. I was actually stationary when they hit me and was blowing my horn, as I could see what was unfolding, and I could also see that they weren't looking!

And yes, initially the insurers suggested 50:50 but I wasn't having that.

I went through my insurance broker and they fought it on my behalf, and there was no further 50:50 nonsense, the other driver's insurance paid out in full.

So do you have a broker?

I think the insurers must do this 50/50 thing as a first port of call. I was reversed into while stationery, and the first letter came back from my insurer saying the other company wanted to go 50/50, and did I have any further details. I sent an even more detailed description than I did in the first instance, and the next letter came back to say they had admitted fault. So I wonder if insurance companies tell people not to admit fault at first?

100% your neighbour's fault. You were stationary, the fact you were mid manoeuvre is irrelevant. They should not have reversed out of a driveway onto a road, that is against the highway code. They were driving dangerously. They did not keep an adequate lookout for other road users, so you should argue they were driving without due care and attention.

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!

I have only had one insurance claim; the guy was off his head, road-raging, I was stationary on a very narrow road, police were called etc etc. It was a horrible experience. Went to court as he lied about everything. The day before court his insurers pulled out of the case as he'd gone awol. I still had to attend court to justify insurance costs as courtesy car was priced ridiculously (nothing to do with me; that's what my insurance organised!) I would throw everything you have at them right now to assure you don't end up down this route. Ultimately, if you were stationary (and I got to the point where I myself questioned if i really was, but I had the hand brake on 😅) stand your ground as it can all be proven from the damage. And they really need to learn to reverse into their drive like you do.

Who repaired your car? You or insurers? There should be an engineers report and photos.
Insurers will always aim for split liability- can you ask to see if any other neighbours saw what happened?

I think nearly all insurance claims start at 50/50 and they try as hard as possible to settle for that. There needs to be clear evidence. Unfortunately it'll come down to your word against theirs. Were there any witnesses or dashcam, have they admitted fault?

OP it sucks.

Suppose, insead of reversing into your property on the left,you had been turning right into a property on the other side of the road. Your car would have been in exactly the same position (as I understand your diagram), though possibly moving not stationary. In that case, if the neighbour had reversed into you, there would be no doubt whatsoever that he was at fault; he would have basically reversed into you from his drive without lookingwhile you were on the public highway, manoevering.

There is no way that you are at fault. 50:50 my arse. Only in my humble opinion, of course.

keep us updated op!

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

The whole manoeuvre