Who is liable?

Cornucopia

Yes - hence my question about whether the OP's observations were those of a reasonably competent driver.

As an aside, I was watching a Police Interceptors programme the other day, and a boy racer in a Subara Impreza had come round a blind corner and driven straight into the back of a stationary lorry that was parked on the far side of the road. The situation suggested both too high speed, and lack of control of the vehicle.

I'm not saying that's the OP's scenario, but it could be similar.

DTDfanBoy

Cornucopia wrote: »

Not necessarily. Too fast is too fast to respond properly to the hazard. She may also have already begun to brake, lessening the speed of impact.

And what speed do we need to drive at in order to be able to respond to people willing to drive into the side of our car, perhaps I need to adjust my driving style and creep past all cars waiting at intersections just in case they decide to drive into the side of me

Cornucopia

AdrianC wrote: »

The OP has told us. The entire length of the road.

How far?

Small problem with that scenario - the rear of the OP's car hit the side of the other car.

That suggests that both vehicles were moving, but it doesn't indicate relative speeds.

Cornucopia

DTDfanBoy wrote: »

And what speed do we need to drive at in order to be able to respond to people willing to drive into the side of our car, perhaps I need to adjust my driving style and creep past all cars waiting at intersections just in case they decide to drive into the side of me

Or if you want to make a sensible point: how long a gap do you look for when turning into a traffic stream that is moving at 30mph compared to 60mph?

AdrianC

Cornucopia wrote: »

How far?

Unless you're suggesting that the other vehicle was travelling way in excess of 60mph as it entered the street (and what shape of junction?), then anything over 54m gives two seconds or more to see it.

That suggests that both vehicles were moving, but it doesn't indicate relative speeds.

No, but the length of the damage to the other car will do.

marleyboy

PlumC wrote: »

Can I just point out I only came here for some advise not to be criticized for how I drive, I am new to MSE. I am very confident in reversing and I'm not lazy about it as I live in a street with many children running about so I am aware of my surroundings. Thank you all for your input but as i said, advise is lovely criticism is not.

Its really not criticism when they say you were in the wrong. As you was.

We could all tip toe around the notion of who is to blame here, but you did ask and to be blunt, you have been answered. It may not be what you want to hear, but we are not here to pretend what you did is all roses to make the scent smell any sweeter.

Cornucopia

AdrianC wrote: »

No, but the length of the damage to the other car will do.

I'm not sure that's true. The other car could have been travelling at 20 or 40, and still have left a long mark down the side of the car. If you're thinking that friction alone would make a huge difference, I'm definitely not sure about that.

Astronaughtwannabe

To quote a poster yesterday in another thread - here we go again, it's "CSI" time.

Time/distance and all other forensic analysis is fine when you're in possession of all the facts but let's face it, the OP has given a brief (one sided version) yet off we go at a tangent.

OP reversed, he will probably be seen as the negligent party (as in most cases of reversing). He got the general consensus he was asking for. It seems pointless dragging this out with a load of 'what ifs', to me it just confuses those seeking advice?

Cornucopia

CSI - yes, that was me. "CSI Petrol Station". That's the one where they forensically examine minor insurance claims for tell-tail signs of blame. Not.

And yes, you are right, the insurers are not going to spend more than 5 minutes on this.

However, in that 5 minutes, the suggestion (if made in good faith) that the other party was driving recklessly ought at least to get the OP to 50/50.

In the general scheme of things, I can certainly empathise with the OP, and remember awkward parking maneouvres where people have passed recklessly and without due regard for my vehicle as a stationary hazard. Not to mention those country lane turns, where you pull up, turn the radio off, and open the windows, because listening is the only way to tell if something is coming, assuming that it's not a Prius, of course.

I think sometimes people here are too quick to judge, and in doing so overlook common sense and recognisable aspects to an OP's story.

Astronaughtwannabe

There's nothing to stop the OP claiming that but if it's just verbiage in a statement, it'll not get him 50/50. There would have to be at least a slight shred of proof, either by way of witness(es) or dashcam or something similar.