Reversing driver always at fault?

Retrogamer

Car A is 100% at fault here IMO.
If child had ran out behind the car, they would have got hit but it wouldn't have been the child's fault.

It sounds like they're one of the many people who reverse using their mirrors and not using the rear window. If they were looking out the rear window when reversing they would have seen the other car approach and stopped before hitting it.

Car B is already on the road so they have right of way and Car A should make sure the road is clear before joining it

bob_a_builder

it is neighbour A who has to pay increased insurance costs etc.

They'll both be stung with increased insurance costs !

Having had an accident, you are statistically more likely to have another/make a further claim - according to the insurance companies anyway

repeatoffender

They would not have seen the car out of their rear mirror as it approached from the side so it would have been their right wing mirror or looking right that should have alerted them. I think is the fact that it could have been a child or pedestrian seems to be the reason that it is always the reversing drivers fault.

Thankfully this was a small incident.

repeatoffender

bob_a_builder wrote: »

They'll both be stung with increased insurance costs !

Having had an accident, you are statistically more likely to have another/make a further claim - according to the insurance companies anyway

Really - even though driver B has no fault against them and is claiming off driver A's insurance? Clearly I am oblivious to the workings of car insurance who seem to win all round

Inch_High_2

repeatoffender wrote: »

Really - even though driver B has no fault against them and is claiming off driver A's insurance? Clearly I am oblivious to the workings of car insurance who seem to win all round

Yes, they have been involved in a collision.

Quentin

repeatoffender wrote: »

Hope this is the place to ask. Two weeks ago I witnessed a small bump between cars with my neighbours and I'm just asking for clarification on here.......
I personally thought B was just as much to blame as A .

When you are a witness your opinion on who is to blame is disregarded, so don't worry.

repeatoffender

Quentin wrote: »

When you are a witness your opinion on who is to blame is disregarded, so don't worry.

Oh I know this, my opinion is irrelevant. However it started a discussion with our neighbours regards insurance and blame - which enlightened me to the fact that a reversing driver is always to blame -and now it would seem that even when it's not your fault you are also penalised :eek:

neilmcl

repeatoffender wrote: »

No the car was not already on the road or across the road. A started reversing out of the drive - the road was clear.

You keep saying this but it doesn't matter at what point the road is clear.

When reversing you have to be aware at ALL times during the manoeuvre, and that means using mirrors AND physically looking round (which very few seem to do these days), and only proceeding with caution, especially when reversing onto a road. Had driver A been doing the above I very much doubt an accident would have occurred, despite what driver B was doing.

Mojisola

neilmcl wrote: »

You keep saying this but it doesn't matter at what point the road is clear.

When reversing you have to be aware at ALL times during the manoeuvre, and that means using mirrors AND physically looking round (which very few seem to do these days), and only proceeding with caution, especially when reversing onto a road. Had driver A been doing the above I very much doubt an accident would have occurred, despite what driver B was doing.

I don't agree with this. If I checked that the road was clear and started reversing off my drive, it wouldn't matter how many times I looked round if a car came round the corner on the wrong side of the road and drove into me. There's no way I could get out of the way in time to prevent the collision.

Just as the reversing driver has to look out for vehicles, children, etc, the driver going forwards has to look out for things on the road.

Iceweasel

It doesn't matter at all that the way was clear when the manouevre was started.

The driver needs to make sure that it's clear during the entire time they are reversing.

I see this sort of thing in supermarket car-parks all the time - heated arguments in Tescos over near misses - folk who start reversing don't stop when someone else passes along the row of parked cars - they expect the car to stop and wait until they have finished reversing.

All very well in Tescos but that doesn't work in a public street.

A car on the 'wrong' side of the road is irrelevant.

if you can't keep a proper lookout - you need a 'banksman' - someone outside the car checking that it's clear to proceed.

I've even seen that being done badly - driver kept the windows shut so couldn't hear the banksman shouting desperately for them to stop.