Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

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 here?

21 replies

Witness55 · 05/12/2019 09:46

I was talking to a neighbour on my doorstep this morning when I witnessed a minor bump. Car 1 had pulled up towards the side of the road (I wasn't paying enough attention to the exact position as I knew what she was going to do). The car then started to reverse back onto the driveway. As the car reversed and turned, a car who had been behind it (car 2) kept driving up the road and hit the front end of car 1.
Car 2 said it's car 1 at fault as driver assumed car 1 was stopping behind my car to park up and didn't know they were going to start reversing.
I will post a diagram but not sure how helpful it will be!

OP posts:
Original poster
Witness55 · 05/12/2019 09:46

Diagram!

Who is at fault here?
OP posts:
RandomMess · 05/12/2019 09:47

You shouldn't reverse if there are cars approaching.

However if car 2 was speeding...

TheTrollFairy · 05/12/2019 09:48

I can’t see a diagram but I would say it’s the fault of Car A who was reversing into the driveway unless they indicated with their hazard lights?
I’m not sure on legally but I was always taught to stop if a car was still travelling along the road and unaware that you are likely to move from your position

TheTrollFairy · 05/12/2019 09:50

I can see the diagram now!
Car 1 is in the wrong as they caused the hazard on the road. They are on the wrong side of the road (which obviously they needed to be to park) but in doing so they moved their car into oncoming traffic

RebootYourEngine · 05/12/2019 09:50

Car 1 should have checked their mirrors before reversing. If car 2 was as close to car 1 as indicated in your diagram then car 1 should not have moved until car 2 had passed.

RollOnNextYear · 05/12/2019 09:52

A was lead to believe it would be car a. As they should of made sure there was plenty of space to manoeuvre. However car b should of seen what car a was doing and stopped.

DryHeaving · 05/12/2019 09:53

Car 1 was reversing into their drive and car 2 hit car 1 when it was reversing? Is that right. ?

MatildaTheCat · 05/12/2019 09:56

Insurance may call it a 50/50.

rhubarbcrumbles · 05/12/2019 09:57

I think it'd be 50-50 - car one shouldn't have started reversing when car two was coming and car two should have stopped. Hard to tell though TBH.

Seeline · 05/12/2019 09:57

Car 1 should not have been reversing unless it was clear to do so. I presume the reversing manoeuvre takes the front of Car 1 into the opposite side of the road, and therefore should not reverse if cars are approaching.

I have to do a similar move to get into my drive, although I start off on the correct side of the road. I never move until the road is clear.

Reallybadidea · 05/12/2019 09:59

It sounds as though car 1 swung into the path of car 2. How could car 2 anticipate that car 1 would start reversing on the wrong side of the road? So I would say that car 1 is at fault but whether insurance will agree 🤷‍♀️

CuriousaboutSamphire · 05/12/2019 10:04

Sensiobly it is 50: 50.

Car 1 shoudn't have crossed the line caused a hazard and Car 2 should have slowed down to miss it, should have been drivig with more care and attention.

But I suspect Car 1 could be held liable as they crossed the carriage. The insurance compnaies will go knock for knock though!

DartmoorChef · 05/12/2019 10:05

Car 1 should have checked the road was clear before reversing.

Seeline · 05/12/2019 10:08

Car 2 should have slowed down to miss it, should have been drivig with more care and attention

TBF we don't know how close car 2 was when car 1 swung out. Even if car 1 had reversing lights, car 2 would not have thought that car 1 was going to swing out in front of them. Even going at 20, if someone just pulls out in front of you, you are going to hit them.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 05/12/2019 10:17

True! But equally of Car 2 was speeding then Car 1 made a decision based on the speed of the road and couldn't have known Car 2 would be speeding up on them!

Which is why I imagine the insurance will go knock for knock!

Original poster
Witness55 · 05/12/2019 11:17

Car 1 was reversing onto a drive yes and car 2 continued up the road and hit the front end when car 1 swung round.
Car 1 driver said car 2 wasnt there when she looked in the mirror.
It is a quiet side street so no other traffic was there. To me, car 2 was being a bit impatient and should have waited to see why car 1 had stopped even if they did wrongly assume they were parking up.

OP posts:
LIZS · 05/12/2019 11:21

Car 1 should be checking before and during manoeuvre, was also on wrong side of road. However car2 should have noted the reversing lights.

Eggies · 05/12/2019 11:23

I always thought that if a car is doing a manoeuvrein the road you're supposed to wait for them to finish before proceeding. So imo car 2 is in the wrong.

LastInTheQueue · 05/12/2019 11:28

So Car 2 drove INTO Car 1?
If Car 1 was mid manoeuvre and the road wasn’t clear for Car 2, then Car 2 is at fault.

Quineothebroch · 05/12/2019 12:19

Insurance companies are tending not to allocate blame or 100% blame unless it is so obvious. Car 1 will submit their claim, car 2 will submit their claim, inless either are calling on witness to say what happened as a point of fact it does not affect allocation of "blame".
Both can lose some or all of the no claims, one or both have their cars getting repaired - only winner is - well, neither of the drivers.

Original poster
Witness55 · 05/12/2019 13:37

Car 2 definitely drove into car 1 as they weren't expecting them to reverse back. I am going to be a witness.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page