Who is at fault for this accident? With diagram

come again

they are asking you for “physical evidence”?

what could you possibly produce?

op what is your insurer saying

and of course they presume you were moving

otherwise begs the question… why weren’t you moving given you were on the road and in fact partly on the other road of the road!

I would think that the absence of any damage to the front or rear of your car would show that you did not drive into them, while the lack of scrapes along the impact point should show you were stationary. Go back to your insurer with photographs showing the above.

Your neighbour has a dent in his boot - it would be quite a trick to hit the back of someone’s car with the side of yours!

No idea of your qualifications on this and happy to be corrected, but ultimately if you drive into a stationary vehicle, reverse or forwards, whether it should be there or not, you're at fault. You need to know where you are putting your vehicle if it's moving...

There’s something somewhere about any car entering the carriageway must give way to any vehicle already on the carriageway.
Plus, you were stationary.
I don’t see how you can possibly be at fault. I think their insurance are just trying their luck

Were you at all aware that the neighbour was about to move when you started?

I would guess they are saying you were in motion and came forward onto their side of the road at the same time they were reversing onto the correct side of the road so 50:50?

No idea how to prove who was moving.

and it would be a sensible assumption to assume that someone in a vehicle in the road (partly on the other side of the road no less)… was moving!!

Problem is that other person haw implied thar both cars were moving, ie reversed into each other. In the absence of independent witnesses, it's unlikely to be financially viable to take legal action to get their money back.

so that’s what their insurer is saying

but what is your insurer saying, as surely it’s them doing the liaising with the insurer on your behalf?

nooe

positioning of hit vehicle is obviously very relevant

The damage should be easy enough to suggest what happened. A stationary/v slow bump v a moving scrape produce v different results! Sorry this happened to you. They should be reversing into their drive like you do by the sounds of things! No idea why people don't do this.

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/using-the-road-reversing.html

It's a "should" rather than a "must"
...but have a look at section 202, about looking carefully and not reversing into obstructions behind you! Exactly what your neighbour did

My car got hit by another late last year when I was parked (fully parked, engine switched off). My insurer tried to say I was at fault and wouldn’t accept that I couldn’t be because I was stationary.

It was a hit and run but I did manage to get the licence plate, so I was able to follow it up and the driver did accept full responsibility. So all sorted. But if he hadn’t accepted responsibility then probably the insurer would have still been trying to blame me!

Insurance will go for 50/50 if they can. My poor colleague was sat in a parking space in Tesco car park, not moving, when someone clipped the front of her car. Bloody insurance wanted to go 50/50.

doesn't matter where on the road she was, at the speeds suggested, and presumably in a residential area, the driver who is moving their vehicle is surely at fault.

How old is his car? Does he not have reversing proximity beeps? I don’t understand how this could even happen. Why didn’t you see him and beep your horn?

I would say that they are claiming 50/50 as you were as unaware of him as he was of you. If you have admitted putting the car in reverse without checking again to look for traffic you will be found partly responsible.

I think you need to speak to your insurance. I thought you being mid manoeuvre gave you right of way especially as he was reversing onto a road from a driveway