A car is driving through a parking lot and another car back up and hits it. The car that was backing up could not see the oncoming car due to the fact that there was a large truck next to it. Who is at fault in a situation like this? Car A, Car B, or the jerk who drives the big truck that was obstructing the view?
The reason for my asking is my wife was involved in this situation yesterday. I purposely did not say who was driving which car to avoid opinions being biased. I am somewhat worried about it because if we have to pay our deductible to have the car fixed then I will most likely be out of the money to have my Cougar shipped out here to me.
Thanks!
Here are some diagrams of how the accident occured.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Loaded87IROC/Parkinglot1.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Loaded87IROC/Parkinglot2.jpg)
Car A would be at fault. No matter how shiznitty the view is, it's car A's responsibility to make sure it's safe to pull out.
Car B is required to exercise due diligence, but is under no obligation to stop at every visual obstruction. Car A was entering the normal flow of traffic and has the obligation to make sure it's safe to do so.
The truck would not be at fault because it is impossible for a vehicle that is not moving to be at fault in an accident. Even if the truck had been parked in a no parking zone or even if it had been parked broadside across a busy road it cannot be at fault because it isn't moving - anyone who hits it would be at fault. Also, blaming him because he drives a big truck would carry about the same weight as him blaming you because you drive a small car.
Car B would only be at fault if you could prove the driver was not driving in a careful manner (speeding, texting while driving, etc). With no witnesses and no skid marks from which to determine speed this would be impossible (though the incident may have been caught on video).
The long and the short of it: You're boned. Unless the driver of car "b" has no insurance, in which case they're automatically considered at fault. The logic behind this: If he doesn't have insurance he shouldn't even be there, and if he hadn't been there you wouldn't have hit him. That is the twisted way insurance companies see things.
I should also point out that some areas consider any parking lot collisions 50/50. Your insurance pays for his car, his pays for yours. The only way to find out if this applies to you would be to talk to your insurance company.
Well, I know the truck isn't responsible, just wanted to call him a jerk because he is my wife's boss and well, he is :) I guess I should mention also that this happened on a military installation.
Car A is most definately at fault.
Yeah, I'd as well say that car A is at fault, although being on a military base, there may well be posted speed limits for the other vehicle. Any witnesses?
Good luck with it:D
Car A
I did the same thing about 20 years ago
I was found to be at fault
There is no speed limit posted in the parking lot. The speed limit on most of the base is 20-25. There were no witnesses. Hopefully this gets resolved well. My wife works with the other driver and both drivers say they are not to blame.
Thanks for the opinions, keep em coming.
Unless you can prove that car B was traveling at an excessive speed and thus contributed to the accident. car A is at fault. If car B did contribute, car A still bears responsibility, just not full responsibility.
Shiny Side Up!
Bill
I did almost the same thing this summer. We were both backing out though, but I was the first to stop. I was in NC at the time though, and it's a no-fault state, so the insurance company, though they said it was only 20% my fault, said they weren't paying for shiznit.
About all you can do if you are A is inch out slowly and hope B either blows their horn or stops and lets you out.
Car b has the right of way.
the military base still falls under DOT of that states laws, "fualt" or "no-fault" state, your still boned.
Thanks for the responses guys. They are pretty much what I thought. My wife was driving car B.
Definitely car A fault.... Car B was already moving and had the right of way.... it's car A's responsibility to make sure there is nothing coming before they move.
Here is a pic of the damage to my wife's car.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Loaded87IROC/2010-03-09143119.jpg)
I had it drilled into my head before I ever drove that if in an accident, never EVER admit fault, whether true or not. With that said..glad to hear you're not car A, and hopefully it gets resolved quickly and painlessly.
:D:D
If every driver was doing everything possible to avoid the accident, neither would have been at fault. When I'm in a parking lot, I do not pull out unless I know it is empty. I have had strangers guide me back before, as well as my freinds. If I can't see, then I'll get out of the car and wait if its busy.
Finally heard back from the other person's insurance. They think that it was 80% their insured's fault and 20% my wife's fault, so they are only agreeing to pay for 80% of the damage and 80% of a rental car. Personally, I think that is BS. I called my claim adjuster (our car is already being repaired by our insurance company) and he very much agreed that it was BS. He told me that the guy's statement to him was something to the tune of "I have a really old big car (74 Buick) and I have trouble backing up and I couldn't see behind me." My insurance guy also said like Haystack commented, that he should have had one of his passengers guide him out if he couldn't see. So my insurance thinks the other party is 100% responsible and is going to take it to arbitration with the other company. He said since they have already agreed to pay 80% of the damage, that is the least we will get, so he waived 80% of our deductible, which I thought was pretty cool. I will let you guys know how it works out. Thanks again for the responses.
True, but if everyone had done everything possible to avoid the accident it never would have happened ;)
Loadediroc: Glad things are coming together...