Who's at Fault? Car Accident When Both Cars Reversing (One out of Parking Spot, The Other into a Parking Spot)

Fat Horny Ghost on 24/05/2021 - 16:36
Last edited 24/05/2021 - 16:50

Hi,

Just wondering who is at fault in this scenario (there is CCTV footage as well) on private property.

Red car was reversing into car parking space, whilst blue car was reversing out and collided into red cars rear wheel)

Scenario:

  1. Red car drove down ramp into basement parking area, and was reversing into Car park space 19.
  2. Blue car was parked in Space 17, and reversed out into red car (at the time was already reversing into 19).
  3. The tow bar of blue car clipped Red Car rear driver side wheel and broke the mud flaps and bolts.

Who is at fault?

Diagrams here:

  1. Before: https://ibb.co/cNn0sZQ
  2. Point of Impact: https://ibb.co/SNDJTN1

Or are both parties at fault?

Poll Options

  • 4
    Red Car at Fault
  • 130
    Blue Car at Fault
  • 63
    Both
Automotive

Comments

  • iNeed2Pee on 24/05/2021 - 16:40
    +5

    Would it be the blue car? Because the blue car should be making an attempt to see if any cars were behind when reversing. In saying that, they (blue) probably couldn't see that the Red was reversing.

    You know what, this is giving me a headache 😂

    • Fat Horny Ghost on 24/05/2021 - 16:43

      There's a small concrete pylon (rectangle shaped in black) that blocked blue cars view, which made it tough for them to see red car while it was reversing

      • iNeed2Pee on 24/05/2021 - 16:44
        +1

        I am going to say it is both at fault. Just shit luck really.

    • HeWhoKnows on 25/05/2021 - 08:40
      +2

      Too easy
      Both REVERSING so BOTH at fault

  • Archi on 24/05/2021 - 16:44

    on the weekend at the local shopping mall..

    an L plated car reverses out of a parking spot directly opposite an elderly man also reversing out of a parking spot at the same time.

    all i heard was the mum yelling at the old guy… "OMG you hit us"

    • Fat Horny Ghost on 24/05/2021 - 16:49
      -1

      This scenario is different since one is reversing into a car park space, and one is reversing out (if both were reversing out of car parking space both will be at fault according to RACQ but doesn't mention about reversing into a spot

      • HeWhoKnows on 25/05/2021 - 08:41
        -1

        BOTH AT FAULT

  • orangetrain on 24/05/2021 - 16:47
    +15

    Blue Car is at fault because they're entering the common area and didn't check surroundings. Why would red car be at fault?

    • Quantumcat on 24/05/2021 - 17:09
      +2

      I think you're right although it is tough for blue car as they might have seen the red car go past and think it was continuing on. And if they didn't see any other cars coming along the path I can see why they would have thought the coast was clear. Unlucky timing for both of them really.

      • orangetrain on 24/05/2021 - 17:25
        +2

        I think blue car would have noticed the red car more easily if they had reversed in initially. The lesson for next time unfortunately.

        • Drakesy on 24/05/2021 - 18:15
          +7

          Plot Twist
          Red car had been in the same situation before and now only reverses into car bays.

          • resisting the urge on 24/05/2021 - 22:39
            +1

            @Drakesy: Argument supporting blue is limited visibility
            And that red managed to proceed to its blind spot, stop and then reverse, blocking its way (in order to park in spot 19). All that without noticing people were in the blue car, and/or starting the engine, preparing to reverse, etc.

            Red should have been watching behind for reverse lights at least, and be ready to sound horn and stop if so.

            But red car did not see (or proceeded anyway).

            No doubt the law makes little difference (private road), and/or insurance company would split the cost 50/50 anyhow.

            • Drakesy on 24/05/2021 - 22:41
              +1

              @resisting the urge: Private roads still would have normal road rule jurisdiction, similar to race tracks, if you don't follow the road rules the insurance still wants to know who contravened. In this case red technically was on the main through road/right of way, with the blue car pulling out into it.

              • resisting the urge on 24/05/2021 - 22:46

                @Drakesy: Would they? I think it could be argued, but am sure you can't claim fault this way in a car park scenario.

                Also, in terms of road rules… both were reversing (not stationery at the point of collision) and apparently failed to see each other.

                Plus if red was driving 'assertively' in and out of its blind spot, blue could easily claim this contributed to the collision.

                • Drakesy on 24/05/2021 - 23:22

                  @resisting the urge: But red (at the point of contact) was t-boned indicating that the red car was reversing safely, with the space behind it unobstructed,, it was the blue car that reversed into it per-sae.

                  • resisting the urge on 25/05/2021 - 08:15

                    @Drakesy: It isn't just about space behind being clear, legal wording is about the 'way being clear'

                    In this instance, a towbar got in the way. In others, it could be a pedestrian's foot, a child even outside the field of view… all kinds of things

    • Iangh on 24/05/2021 - 18:19
      +2

      Yes, Blue car as it is entering active traffic area from parking space. Should have checked, seen Red car in traffic area and stopped.

    • 87percent on 24/05/2021 - 16:53
      +2

      Why not?

      • GG57 on 24/05/2021 - 16:55
        +1

        A parking space is almost always the more confined space.

        • [Deactivated] on 24/05/2021 - 17:03
          +3

          huh?

      • GG57 on 27/05/2021 - 15:20

        "- You are going forwards into a small space and reversing into a big space
        - If you use your mirrors and look around before reversing out, safety should not be an issue
        - Reversing into a park means that people exit faster from a parking space and will be less vigilant on their way out
        - loading groceries when one’s trunk was nestled up close to another vehicle can be difficult
        - Head in parking minimizes the risk of denting an adjacent parked car"

    • FireRunner on 24/05/2021 - 17:05

      They prefer a quick getaway

    • Quantumcat on 24/05/2021 - 17:07
      +1

      It is easier to get the right angle by reversing in, and it is much easier to get out too. If the blue car had reversed in it might have stood a better chance at spotting the red car and waiting for it before exiting its spot.

      Been thinking for a few minutes why I find it easier to reverse in, and I think it is because you can see the whole car behind you and can get a better idea of where it will end up depending how far behind you start / when you start to turn the wheel. Whereas by going front in it is harder to tell as you don't get that whole picture of where your car is in space. If I try to go front in (and I only do it if one of the spaces next to me if free) I inevitably roll over that empty space while parking even though I end up straight and within the lines. If you have a lot of driving experience or have excellent spacial awareness skills you might not find any difference between the difficulty of reversing or driving straight in (maybe that applies to you gg67)

    • Mike88 on 24/05/2021 - 17:12
      +3

      Driving a large ute with poor visibility at the back, it is much easier to reverse in than reverse out. You know what is behind you when you are already on the road, it can be difficulty if not impossible sometimes to see what oncoming traffic there is when reversing out.
      Also it is easier to reverse in with a large vehicle with a poor turning circle.

      • Shadowsfury on 24/05/2021 - 18:48
        +3

        I agree I always reverse and park.

        Not just visibility but the wheels of the car are on the front - so it just doesn't really angle well if you want to go straight into a lot.

        • kiitos on 25/05/2021 - 13:15

          Interesting, I have wheels both front and rear.

          :-)

    • Godric on 24/05/2021 - 18:07

      It's not difficult….. i mean for some

    • Eeples on 24/05/2021 - 19:30
      +1

      Some might think it is dangerous to reverse out of the car space.

      I reverse in when there are no cars are about.

    • pjetson on 24/05/2021 - 20:18
      +1

      I never really understand why people feel the need to reverse into a parking space

      For a quick getaway?

    • elgrande on 24/05/2021 - 21:05
      +1

      Reverse cams..

      Once I have a front cam I will go back to parking normal..

    • bamzero on 25/05/2021 - 10:43
      +1

      So you don't hit the red car when reversing out obviously.

  • mountains on 24/05/2021 - 17:05
    +3

    Another example Why I park Front Facing ( if I were in need to park at Blue Car Spot). Kinda hard to blame anyone here. Unlucky scenerio though.

    • Euphemistic on 24/05/2021 - 18:53

      So you’d be the blue car in this situation?

      • mountains on 24/05/2021 - 21:30
        +1

        Nah! I mean I would reverse park into that spot. So getting out would not cause this :)

        • Quantumcat on 24/05/2021 - 21:39
          +2

          The people that negged just misunderstood what you meant

  • codewana on 24/05/2021 - 17:08

    I vote blue car is at fault. This is because the red car had to have been there already at the time of impact (and thus the blue car hit the red car's wheels). In reality, it's both who are at fault, but if I had to assign one party to shoulder the majority of the blame, it'd be the blue car. Just my $0.02.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/05/2021 - 17:15

    The blue car is most at fault as the red car is already occupying the 'lanes' and would have the genuine right of way. Blue car failed to yield when entering the flow of traffic so would be more at fault. However this would likely be ruled a 50/50 fault as both parties failed to negotiate their maneuvers without hitting each other.

  • Drakesy on 24/05/2021 - 17:19
    +1

    I'd say as red is currently occupying the through lane then the blue car would have to give way to everyone/thing prior to entering the lane. Red wouldn't necessarily be expecting anyone to enter into their lane given it's a right of way.

    So in short, sh1t luck
    but yes, blue is most at fault

  • djkelly69 on 24/05/2021 - 17:22
    +2

    Speaking from a similar personal experience, as soon as you tell the insurance company both cars were reversing, they will tell you both of you are at fault (no matter how much you try to explain that one was reversing in a slow, safe manner, and the other came flying out in reverse without looking).

    Now if your car had stopped completely because you saw the other car coming, I believe it is then a different story…

    • JimmyF on 24/05/2021 - 17:56
      -2

      Agreed, whoever was reversing was at fault, in this case both are, so both are at fault.

  • Eeples on 24/05/2021 - 19:31
    +1

    Did anyone toot?

  • noob999 on 24/05/2021 - 19:36
    +2

    Not legal advice… but I just was in similar circumstances last year. Speak to your insurer.

    I Rang NRMA and they said both drivers at fault as you were both reversing. Because you were BOTH reversing you are not liable for other party damage, just your own damage. I had to pay the excess so NRMA could fight it on my behalf and when settled I get my excess back.
    Other party raised $9k damages claim against me, I sent notice to NRMA. 2 weeks later the case was cleared and my excess returned.
    I had no damage as I stopped when other party kept reversing and slide across a taillight protection bar.

    While speaking to NRMA I raised the question why they sent a claim for damages when insurers know this about reversing cars?
    Comment was maybe I was not insured and did not know the rules and they get paid!
    Even if I was not insured I'm still not liable - I still would not have to pay their bill but I would probably needed to have some legal advice telling them to go away citing proper codes etc.

    So call your insurer and ask questions!

  • resubaehtgnolhcs on 24/05/2021 - 21:06
    +4

    Back in the day when I was taught to drive, you always looked out the rear window when reversing, and you continued looking out that window (as well as using your periphery vision) until you had finished reversing. Now if you're looking out the back window you should be able to see (in most instances), any other cars, people, shopping trolleys etc.

    I guess with reverse cameras, reverse sensors, cross traffic sensors etc, people just don't look out the back window anymore …

    • bazingaa on 24/05/2021 - 21:53

      I was taught the same and I am still doing it.

  • pegaxs on 24/05/2021 - 21:10
    +4

    Blue car at fault. It hit the side of the red car. If they hit on their respective corners because they both moved back at exactly the same time, I would say both. But by your drawing, it looks like the red car was moving first and the blue car just reversed into the side of the red car.

    • Mugsy on 25/05/2021 - 08:11
      +2

      Agree. And even if the red car wasn't moving, from the description given, the red car in no way moved towards the blue car to hit them. Blue car maneuvered into red car.

  • SF3 on 24/05/2021 - 21:55

    Get a new car spot, your spot has been designed to put the owner at risk. ;)

  • HeWhoKnows on 25/05/2021 - 08:39

    Been through this one myself.
    I can GUARANTEE you the insurance company will deem BOTH at fault

  • jsb on 25/05/2021 - 09:31
    +2

    Based on the impact as per the diagram, blue car is at fault. Clearly he was not looking before reversing. I would have said both at fault if the damage would have been at corner of both cars.

  • RedFromBlue on 25/05/2021 - 09:38
    +2

    Really? Car is entering a road from stationary and needs to ask who should give way? What other of the 3 base road rules does OP not know and needs to come to this forum to ask?

    Come on, learn the rules then drive, not the other way around, will result in posting more questions like this one…..

  • UserNameCheckIn on 25/05/2021 - 10:02

    There no Obama vote?

  • Noblejoker on 25/05/2021 - 11:55
    -2

    From an INSURANCE point of view
    2 moving cars on private property = each bear own damage
    Even if the one driver admits fault when they lodge their claim the insurer will likely decline to pay the other party
    There are really no 'road rules' in private car park, none that are enforceable
    No police or other 'judge' of who is at fault
    It just becomes a civil dispute and most insurers are not going to court to argue their side

  • OzHunterNSW on 26/05/2021 - 10:07
    +3

    What would make you think the BLUE car is NOT at fault?

    • Davo1111 on 27/05/2021 - 19:42
      -2

      My understanding is insurance companies blame the reversing driver, irrispective of "fault". So it's probably an even split.

  • Fat Horny Ghost on 11/08/2021 - 19:54
    +1

    Just an update.

    Blue Car has paid for damages to the red car.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join