Reversing Liability

harrys_dad

You were moving and hit something, how can that not be your fault? You were also going the wrong way down a 1-way street (albeit backwards). What difference does it make anyway? (unless you consider you were not at fault at all, which seems frankly ridiculous) Shared fault or totally your fault will likely have the same effect on your premiums.

arcon5

If the car appeared from nowhere you would have hit the front near side. You hit rear offside, so unless the car was going quite fast in the school grounds this could easily be a couple seconds

arcon5

harrys_dad wrote: »

You were moving and hit something, how can that not be your fault? You were also going the wrong way down a 1-way street (albeit backwards). What difference does it make anyway? (unless you consider you were not at fault at all, which seems frankly ridiculous) Shared fault or totally your fault will likely have the same effect on your premiums.

Not sure how you equate fault with the mere fact op was moving .

InsideInsurance

harrys_dad wrote: »

You were also going the wrong way down a 1-way street (albeit backwards). What difference does it make anyway?

If you are pulling out from a side road onto a one way street you should still check both ways despite it being one way as pedestrians may be crossing, cyclists could be going the wrong way etc etc

harrys_dad

InsideInsurance wrote: »

If you are pulling out from a side road onto a one way street you should still check both ways despite it being one way as pedestrians may be crossing, cyclists could be going the wrong way etc etc

I agree, so it could still be shared fault, which would hit premiums the same. The point I was trying to make it that it is very difficult to see how the OP could not be at fault at all.

InsideInsurance

harrys_dad wrote: »

I agree, so it could still be shared fault, which would hit premiums the same. The point I was trying to make it that it is very difficult to see how the OP could not be at fault at all.

But result in them being able to get part of their excess/ uninsured losses back

curlydog

harrys_dad wrote: »

I agree, so it could still be shared fault, which would hit premiums the same. The point I was trying to make it that it is very difficult to see how the OP could not be at fault at all.

I think this is getting to the heart of what I was after. I have never denied liability, but have felt uncomfortable with my insurers stance that I was wholly liable due to the fact I was reversing. I did all I could to check that there was nothing behind me. The other party have not checked that their path was clear before pulling out into the path of my reversing vehicle. To me it seems there must be some liability on their part for not checking their path was clear.

Having said that, it appears from what is being said, the affect will will be the same on my premiums whether I am held fully or partially at fault, so really it makes no difference. The damage was minor to both vehicles. Mine was so minor I'm not making a claim. Most of the marks on the other car rubbed off, leaving a very small dent.

dacouch

Reversing the wrong way along a one way road...

Stoke

dacouch wrote: »

Reversing the wrong way along a one way road...

This.

I desperately want to side with the OP, but I can't get past that fact. It's a one way road for a reason, possibly to stop the kind of accident that you experienced.

Sorry.

londonTiger

you really should turn around and look back when reversing instead of sitting facing front and using mirrors to guide you.

So many blind spots are missed with just mirrors. Your also unable to use your peripheral vision when using mirrors too. If you were to actually look back you would catch the car coming out in the corner of your eye.

Both insurance companies willjust agree to put fault on the "most likely" person at fault. It's a tiny accident with very little damage cost. Otherwise their admin cost will mount up if they go backwards and forwards trying to assign blame to other party. Unfortunately if both parties use the same insrer then this is even more likely.

You dont have to accept their decision and fight it - but whether it's worth it is down to you. Because a judge will most likely place you responsible,