Car Park claim

[Deleted User]

They are just trying it on. In the event of an accident some people will just try to blame the other person and convince them that they are at fault.

InsideInsurance

DELETED USER wrote:

They are just trying it on. In the event of an accident some people will just try to blame the other person and convince them that they are at fault.

To be fair, its not always people trying it on but a symptom of bad observational skills and bad habits is the fact they dont know where others have come from or exactly where their own vehicle is.

I dont doubt in many roundabout collisions where both parties were on the roundabout and claim the other encroached into their lane that both would pass a polygraph test when clearly it cannot be the case that both maintained proper lane discipline


As with any accident, clear explanation of the accident circumstances is crucial and its important to focus on the elements that are really relevant to the case as to neither confuse people or create the possibility of doubt.

In the first instance I'd have put this down as "I was driving down the aisle of a carpark when the third party reversed out of their space colliding with the X of my car". The comments about you having reversed out of a space earlier just adds unnecessary noise

oldbaldman

II makes a good point above, and gives an ideal written account. The more you say the more the other side can pick holes. And the more likely you are to expand still further and give more opportunity for more holes.

As an example of questions I would put to you if I were representing the other side:

Did you not see their illuminated reversing lights on the Volvo as you approached?

How close were you to that side of the aisle?

On the balance of probability who is more likely to be travelling quickly? The driver who has a clear aisle ahead of him, or the driver reversing out of a parking space into an aisle where there is likely to be vehicular movement?

Accepting what you say as correct, it does appear that they are more at fault than you.

obm

OnanTheBarbarian

So long as the original poster has not had to move all the way out over onto the other side and been hit when the Volvo deviant was 3/4 of the way out of his space, I can't see how the original poster should be accepting any contributory negligence.

henrygregory

georgiemchisholm wrote: »

Hi All, I am hoping you can help me out because I've been worried out of my mind over this!
Yesterday, I was leaving Tescos car park. I had reversed out of my bay, across the lane of opposing traffic, acknowledged the driver who had slowed to allow me to finish my manoeuvre and made progress out of the car park. I cant have travelled more than 20 feet when a Volvo XC60 reversed square into the side of me. (The damage begins at the back of my front wheel arch and finishes before the front of my rear wheel arch).
I got out of the car and the first thing the driver said to me was, "i'll be getting a new bumper off you then" and his snotty wife said "is that even insured?" - To explain, I drive a 20 year old VW Golf convertible which isn't so easy on the eye, but being a biker, a car is merely a boat for shopping! However I am fully comp with Green Insurance (Aviva).

If they hadn't have been so audacious, I would have suggested a hand shake would have solved the matter, because another scrape on my 20 year old banger was inconsequential to me.

They went on to say that I was speeding and that there is no way they could have seen me. - There is no way I could have been speeding having literally just changed from reverse into first gear.

To finish snotty woman insisted on calling the Police, after an hour of waiting the cop came along and said "looks like they have reversed into your line of way". However, they seemed to get a witness on side to say that I was speeding? However nice copper said that "speed is a perception and impossible to prove"

I really cant afford to lose my no claims and quite frankly I'm so affronted by their audacity, I'm wondering if I should just make a claim on their insurance.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Havent slept worrying about it. As far as I can see, I have done nothing wrong. I can't prove I wasn't speeding - just as they can't prove I was. But I can prove that the damage is in the middle of my car. Are they just chancing it or am I being naïve?

Pah, well they can't be that snotty if they shop at Tesco! I feel for you, they sound like the worst people to be involved with. You may as well put in a claim, I can't see how this can be pinned on you, they pulled into your path.
Let's hope they go back to Waitrose and damage other snotty peoples' cars!