[Apollo]

I was the passenger in a car involved in a collision and because of the nature of how it’s happened, both drivers are unsure who’s to blame, I figured I’d ask some opinions

The Location is an empty street used as a car park, all the cars park facing a fence/rear to the fence.

Car 1 was parking in a spot, reversed out slightly to straighten before going back in.

Car 2 was reversing along the row of cars, having already pulled out of the parking spot and trying to get space to do a 3-point turn

Both cars collided, Car 1 showing damage slightly to the right of the reg plate on the bumper, Car 2 having a huge football sized dent in the passenger side corner of the bumper.

Neither one wants to admit fault, but clearly someone is. What do you guys think?

[Beelzebub]

@ApolloIt appears that car 1 drove into the side of car 2, so at fault.

Probably because the driver was relying on his mirrors, instead of "looking mainly through the rear window" (see Highway Code Rule 202).

[TC1474]

Originally Posted by Apollo

I was the passenger in a car involved in a collision and because of the nature of how it’s happened, both drivers are unsure who’s to blame, I figured I’d ask some opinions

The Location is an empty street used as a car park, all the cars park facing a fence/rear to the fence.

Car 1 was parking in a spot, reversed out slightly to straighten before going back in.

Car 2 was reversing along the row of cars, having already pulled out of the parking spot and trying to get space to do a 3-point turn

Both cars collided, Car 1 showing damage slightly to the right of the reg plate on the bumper, Car 2 having a huge football sized dent in the passenger side corner of the bumper.

Neither one wants to admit fault, but clearly someone is. What do you guys think?

Every one of these type of crashes I have been involved in has always gone 50/50 split liability.

Don't be surprised if this goes down the same route..