Accident liability

rev_henry

Not sure I have anywhere to go with this however...

I was involved in an accident a few weeks ago. I was leaving a car park onto the access road to said car park (and to a few other places). Cars were parked all along the access road (possibly on double yellow lines) obscuring visibility for me leaving, which is pretty common there.
I was edging out very slowly for obvious reasons. Car comes zooming up the access road at a speed I would consider excessive. I braked as soon as I saw/heard him but too late and he hits me.
From my perspective, he should have seen the corner of my vehicle emerging well before I had the opportunity to see him (as the parked cars obscured my view more than his). Had he been travelling at a reasonable speed he would have been able to stop/avoid me.
However my insurers have now said, without e.g. dashcam footage to prove his excess speed they cannot reasonably dispute liability given he had right of way.
I should add both of us know the road very well (and this is provable) so would be familiar with the visibility issues and be aware of vehicles emerging from that car park.

Do I have any way of defending this? Very frustrating given my thus far unblemished driving record  

facade

Let it go.

You pulled out from between parked cars into the path of another vehicle- it is your fault.

Even if you can prove that he was speeding and that this contributed to the accident, it would just apportion split liability- from 100% you maybe down as far as 50:50,  it would still count as an "at fault" claim against you.

You need to prove that he swerved into you to get any better than 50:50.

400ixl

Your insurer is correct, it is your responsibility when entering the main traffic flow. Their speed doesn't come into it. 
You wouldn't get it to a no fault claim even with dash cam footage from what you have described.

That's what insurance is for, times when you just misjudge it.

Best to just not use that car park if it is always restricted visibility.

Mildly_Miffed

Step back and look at what the insurers are looking at, dispassionately.

Driver A says they were carefully nosing out and B was going far too fast.
Driver B says they were driving sensibly and A just pulled out.

Which to believe, in the lack of any other evidence?

Known fact: B was on the main road, and had priority. A was joining it.

THAT is the situation the insurers are in...

clive0510

If as you say there were double yellow lines there, then the parked cars should not of been there. double yellow lines are there for a reason- ie to stop things like this happening. each one of those cars parked there deserves to get a ticket. where are the traffic wardens when you need one. 
as for your own predicament it looks to me like it was your responsibility to ensure all was clear before pulling out.

Mildly_Miffed

clive0510 said:

If as you say there were double yellow lines there, then the parked cars should not of been there.

Unfortunately for the OP, that's irrelevant to the claim.

We have to drive in the world as we find it, not the one we'd like.

leonj

It's not your fault if what you say is true, there is nothing you could have done differently, the other driver was the only one who could have prevented the accident but like they say you have no proof of his speed

rev_henry

Thanks for replies all. Reassures me at least that I can't really do anything.

Although given this is an internet forum I feel obliged to say I hate you all for giving me an answer I didn't like.   

rev_henry

Mildly_Miffed said:

clive0510 said:

If as you say there were double yellow lines there, then the parked cars should not of been there.

Unfortunately for the OP, that's irrelevant to the claim.

We have to drive in the world as we find it, not the one we'd like.

funnily enough that was kinda what the insurer claims person said when I raised the same point.