Uninsured driver question

Car_54

Fragilicious wrote: »

When he asked for my details I advised him to use my licence number to get the information (I wasn't about to share info like that yet) so he suggested that we keep this outside of insurance companies, I agreed.

We swapped phone numbers and have come to an agreement on resolving this so I am not really worried but I do have a few questions.

Since there was no injury, he had no obligation to give you his insurance details.

You, on the other hand, were required by law to give your name and address.

Fragilicious

Well clearly I'm a terrible person for not providing all my personal details to a complete stranger after maliciously ramming him with my car. I can only hope he is a much nicer person than I am.

This thread was helpful to a point, and I thank those that helped.

AdrianC

Fragilicious wrote: »

Swapping insurance details is standard, even if there seems to be no damage on initial inspection right?

If there's any dispute about blame, then - yes - both sides would give their details over.
If the blame is clear-cut (as here), then - no - there's no need for the person who isn't at fault to give theirs over.

As above, when we went to swap details, he refused to give me his.

Frankly, so would I have. Because they're utterly irrelevant.

It's not as though he asked for my details and I said no.

So you did give them to him?
Your original post said otherwise...

When he asked for my details I advised him to use my licence number to get the information (I wasn't about to share info like that yet)

If that isn't "he asked and I said no", then what is it?

Also, I'd like to recognise that the fault is mine only from the classic perspective of the insurance company.

No, the fault is entirely 100% yours in every single imaginable way. You reversed out without being able to see if it was clear to do so, and hit another car.

Don't know if it's just me but I kinda feel like people think I'm inconsiderate at best, dangerous at worst. It's not like I put the car in reverse and sped out.

Well, you ARE to blame for the collision, and you DID refuse to hand your insurance details over. But, apart from that, I'm sure you're a nice person, mostly.

Norman_Castle

Well, you ARE to blame for the collision

Not necessarily. If you see a car reversing out from a space with restricted view would you drive into its path?.

Both drivers should exchange name and address details. No requirement to give insurance details.
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/if-youre-in-an-accident

I wouldn't consider "get them off my number plate" as exchanging details.

InsideInsurance

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Not necessarily. If you see a car reversing out from a space with restricted view would you drive into its path?.

The reversing party has the greater duty of care due to the issues with visibility etc. As such, unless there are independent witness/ CCTV etc to show the correctly proceeding vehicle accelerated to try and beat them, intentionally rammed them or in some other way acted unreasonably then the reversing party will be held liable.

It's the same as saying you pulled out of the side road without giving way but the car on the main road would have had time to break and stop without hitting you if it had wanted to.

AdrianC

The OP says he has footage of the other car. I'm intrigued to know what angle this camera was pointing at, that it can show the other car approaching so clearly with the OP having no way of knowing it was there or avoiding it.

Maybe a YouTube link would help?

Norman_Castle

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The reversing party has the greater duty of care due to the issues with visibility etc. As such, unless there are independent witness/ CCTV etc to show the correctly proceeding vehicle accelerated to try and beat them, intentionally rammed them or in some other way acted unreasonably then the reversing party will be held liable.

It's the same as saying you pulled out of the side road without giving way but the car on the main road would have had time to break and stop without hitting you if it had wanted to.

I'm not saying the op's not at fault. I'm saying, as confirmed by you, its not a foregone conclusion. The op could argue he drove with due care and the other driver was unreasonable to drive behind a visibly reversing car and as such both drivers should have given their details.

Its not the same as a car pulling out of a side road. The lanes between parked cars are to access the parking spaces. There is an assumed and accepted priority but not a right of way. In a car park cars will need to manoeuvre into and out of the spaces and cars moving on the access lanes should allow for this and drive accordingly.