[johnPomp]

Hello all,
any help greatly appreciated.
I was coming out of a parking bay at my gym when I bumped into a car that came into the parking way but going the wrong direction (they entered from the wrong way). So I checked for traffic but not from the wrong direction.
Am I likely to be at fault here?

thank you

[olduser]

At a guess, the best you could hope for is 50/50.

I think, you have to prove the other vehicle drove into you, rather than them having to prove they didn't.
The idea is, if you cannot see the way is clear you should not move, as you say you didn't look.
Often this feels unfair but if you think about it it's the only logical way.

The modern trend seems to be to use mirrors to reverse by but it is not as safe as partially turning in the seat and looking, that way we have the benefit of peripheral vision which is very sensitive to movement.

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by olduser

At a guess, the best you could hope for is 50/50.

I think, you have to prove the other vehicle drove into you, rather than them having to prove they didn't.
The idea is, if you cannot see the way is clear you should not move, as you say you didn't look.
Often this feels unfair but if you think about it it's the only logical way.

The modern trend seems to be to use mirrors to reverse by but it is not as safe as partially turning in the seat and looking, that way we have the benefit of peripheral vision which is very sensitive to movement.

Exactly. The Highway Code is clear on this, and the OP was almost certainly taught to turn round and look, and he would had to do so to pass his test. (Unless of course some physical condition prevented it.)

At some stage he would also been taught never to assume anything, especially that other road users would follow the rules.

[johnPomp]

Originally Posted by olduser

At a guess, the best you could hope for is 50/50.

I think, you have to prove the other vehicle drove into you, rather than them having to prove they didn't.
The idea is, if you cannot see the way is clear you should not move, as you say you didn't look.
Often this feels unfair but if you think about it it's the only logical way.

The modern trend seems to be to use mirrors to reverse by but it is not as safe as partially turning in the seat and looking, that way we have the benefit of peripheral vision which is very sensitive to movement.

Thank you.

OK the consensus is I am at fault. Clearly I don't plan to make a claim. Therefore the right thing to do is inform my insurer of the incident and alert them, another driver may make a claim. right?


You are right it does seem unfair because the other car should not be coming from the way it did, and I will also mention it takes a fraction of a second to get from where they entered (illegally) the parking way to get to the spot I was in. And I can't stress enough how much I would not anticipate anyone to enter the wrong way.

For the record I have something like 17 years no claims or more, so I never had to do this.

[johnPomp]

Originally Posted by Beelzebub

Exactly. The Highway Code is clear on this, and the OP was almost certainly taught to turn round and look, and he would had to do so to pass his test. (Unless of course some physical condition prevented it.)

At some stage he would also been taught never to assume anything, especially that other road users would follow the rules.

The OP is grateful for your view will inform the insurance they are at fault.

Cannot stress how little reaction time the other driver gave me by entering illegally from the no entry part of the parking way and how this is the first time I had an incident of any kind since I got my driver's licence 17+ years ago.

But as you say.... I was clearly taught at some point to look and I should have looked. But then again , even if I had looked I wouldn't have seen the other car because of the geography of the place, which is why I guess the gym marked that way as a non entry way.
But hey... if I am at fault, I am at fault.

[Drivingforfun]

I’m surprised by this

I’d not go so far to call the collision your fault than that it was within your means to have avoided it, which is the case with the vast majority of non-fault claims

Not doubting the views of the others, but just think it’s a bit unfair. But it’s well known that if you pull out in front of a speeding driver it’s considered up to you to allow for them despite them breaking the rules, so I guess this is similar?

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by johnPomp

The OP is grateful for your view will inform the insurance they are at fault.

Do NOT tell them you're at fault: that's not your job. Just give them the facts and let the two insurers argue it out.

[TC1474]

As said elsewhere, do not admit liability, give your insurers the facts and leave it to them.

The other driver also has a statutory duty of care which appears to have been disregarded, so I am prepared to bet that this will go split liability 50/50