Non Fault and Fault Motor Claims

Non Fault Accidents.

So long as your insurer is able to make a full recovery for all of all the costs involved in a claim then it will be classed as a Non-Fault Claim. Classic examples of non-fault claims are:

You are hit by a third party vehicle while stationary

You are hit by a third party vehicle in rear.

You are hit by a third party vehicle exiting a side street.

You are hit by a reversing third party vehicle.

You are hit by a third party vehicle that is turning across your path.

Fault Accidents.

You will be at fault if you carried out a manoeuvre that directly contributed to the accident happening. Typical examples of circumstances where you would be held at fault are:

You hit a stationary/parked third party vehicle

You hit another third party vehicle in the rear

You hit a third party vehicle on the main road as you exited a side street

You hit a third party vehicle while reversing

You hit a third party vehicle if you turn across its path.

Sometimes people will put forward mitigating circumstances to try to persuade their insurance company that they are not really at fault. By says such things as:

“But the other driver was going too fast.”

An argument often put forward especially in an accident involving one car exiting a side road and hitting a vehicle on the main road. But it is an argument that clearly points to you being at fault. If you could see that the other car was travelling at speed then you should have let them to pass and waited until the way ahead was clear.

In any case, It doesn't matter how fast the other person was driving the deciding factor is that you carried out an manoeuvre that was directly responsible for the collision. The car on the main road always has the right of way even if they were driving too fast which cannot be proved by your insurer in any case. Nor does it matter if the driver of the other car was drunk with his feet on the dashboard a mobile phone in one hand and a sandwich in the other; they still have the right of way and if you hit them you are at fault.

“I couldn’t see him because my view was obstructed."

You are edging out of a side street but your view is obstructed by parked cars for instance, or by hedges along the side of the road, or perhaps you didn't see the other car because they were coming round a bend in the road. And as a result you hit the car on the main road. It’s your fault. You might not have done anything wrong because you might have taken every precaution to guard against the possibility of something like this happening. But if it does, it will be your fault. Again because the vehicle on the main road always has the right of way and it was by your actions the accident happened. When you are in your car you drive at your own risk.

“He shouldn’t have been parked there/He was parked illegally."

That doesn' t matter. He was there to be seen and it is your responsibility to make sure that the way is clear before you carried out your manoeuvre.

“But he was indicating to turn left.”

You are at a junction waiting to join the main road. You look to your right and see a car on the main road coming towards you indicating left. You assume that he will be turning down into your side street. You exit onto the main road but instead of turning left the car on the main road continues straight on and there is a crash. You are at fault. You shouldn't t have assumed he was turning left. You should not have moved away onto the main road until you were sure that indeed he was turning left.

“He stopped very suddenly and for no reason.”

It is your responsibility to keep a safe braking distance between you and the car in front. The fact that you hit him proves you were too close .

“He should have seen me reversing."

No. You should have checked to make sure that the way was clear for you to reverse. Likewise, if you check before you start reversing to make sure the way is clear but a car suddenly appears behind you while you are reversing and you hit it you will still be held at fault. Reversing is an inherently risky and it is therefore your responsibility to make sure you carry out this manoeuvre safely .

“There was a car stationary on the main road. He flashed his lights to say it was okay for me to move into the line of traffic in front of him when he suddenly started to move forward and hit me."

You are at fault as he had the right of way. Likewise if a driver on a main road flashes his lights to indicate that it is okay for you to exit the side street and you do but you then hit another third party vehicle on the main road you will be held at fault. Because it is your responsibility to check that the way is clear.

A Brief Summery.

You are at fault if you did something that directly contributed to the accident. Even if you couldn’t help it, even if you did everything humanly possible under the circumstances to make sure that an accident didn’t happen you will be held at fault.

More by this Author

  • claiming on your motor insurance policy

    When should you report an incident to your insurer? The sooner the better. Typically your policy booklet will point out that you need to report any incident (whether or not there was any damage and...

  • Disputed Motor Claims

    A disputed liability claim is not ‘knock for knock.’ A knock for knock claim is one in which both drivers accept that there was nothing they could do to avoid the accident and that neither was to blame. Both...

  • Total Loss Motor Claims

    My car should not have been written off as a Total Loss. But it will be if your insurance company believes that the cost of repairing your car is going to be more than your car is worth. If the cost of the claim to...

Comments 470 comments

J. Bailey 5 years ago

what happens if you reverse and the stationary car behind beeps and you stop BEFORE hitting them and they they claim you hit them and damaged their bumper which clearly has ancient damage to it..whilst yours has none largely cos you never hit them!

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 5 years ago from LEEDS Author

The critical factor here is: you were reversing and as such you are considered to be at fault if you hit anything. But if you say you didn't one of two things will happen.

1) The Third Party insurer will (or ought to) tell their insured that there is no damage consistant with their allegation that you reversed into them. Or

2) If they say that actually you did hit their insured you insurer can request that they see a copy of the TP engineer report.

If your insurance company accepts that you did cause damage to the bumper of the other car they will only pay for the repairs for the damage you caused. And be aware that just because there is no damage to your car that is not considered as proof that you didn't reverse into anything.

sophia 4 years ago

I was at the left turning lane and a truck is in my right also turning left but turn towards my lane and hit my right front fender who is at fault?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Sophia,

From your description I am assuming that the truck was ahead of you a bit before turning left into the side street that you were turning into. I'm applying UK road rules here (so if you're from the USA it could be different) but assuming you're driving in the UK this might be disputed. Usually if you are behind the truck then it is up to you to be aware of what the taffic ahead of you is doing. But, this is where the dispute comes in: you could argue that he cut in front of you putting the truck at fault except that he might deny that and say "i was already turning when she ran into me". The area of damage wont help you either. It might take a witness to help you out here who says definitively that; the truck changed lanes into your path as he made a left turn into the same side street you were turning into. Good luck.

clare 4 years ago

I hit car number 2 in the rear as it was trying to avoid car number 1. Car number 1 had performed an illegal turn and obstructed car 2. Car 2 then claimed against me because car 1 left the scene and I couldn't read the numberplate. I asked the police for footage from a nearby camera but they said it was not switched on. The other car 2 driver agreed that it was not my fault at the time. I submitted my side to the insurer who paid out to car 2 without telling me. Is there any caselaw on similar circumstances that you know of please?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

I'm sorry Clare but this is an easy one. You are at fault simply because you hit car 2 in the rear. No matter what the extenuating circumstances are the golden rule of motor claims as far as any insurer is concerned is: you are at fault if you hit another car in the rear. And remember this; even if your insurer accepted you are not to blame how will they persuade the insurer of car one (if they could trace it) of that? Answer they wont be able too. Nor will the insurer of car 2 be persauded that their drive was in anyway at fault. And again, even if car 1 is traced and it is established by a witness or cctv (for arguemnents sake) that he did make an illegal turn it wont necessarily let you off the hook because the counter arguemnt that will be put is; "Oh sure car 1 acted thoughtlessly but you, Clare, should be aware of the road conditions and other road users around you and be ready of anything. And because you weren't the accident happened and therefore it's your fault.' That's what they will say because that is what I told my policyholders who were in a similar situation to you.

I know you want your insurer to fight your corner but they wont because they will spend a fortune in legal costs that will last years and years and still loose at the end of it and while that is all going on you'll still have a fault claim on your record. Sorry I couldn't be more positive.

clare 4 years ago

cheers - but even if they came into my path?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

I am assuming you mean - you hit car 2 in the rear trying to avoid car 1 as it carried out its illegal manoeuvre? His insurer will agrue that is no good reason to hit car 2 in the rear. To complicate matters even further. lets suppose car 1 is traced. He could very easy say to his insurer...accident? what accident? I wasn't involved. my car is not damaged. And his insurer will get back to you and say...sorry, but he says he wasn't involved and we'll take his word for it. But if you could present CCTV footage that might simply make their case: that you should have/could have avoided hitting car 2 in the rear.

Abi 4 years ago

A neighbour reversed into me while i was stationary in the middle of the road. I was driving my boyfriends car not mine so therefore am only covered 3rd party. She has told her insurance company i drove into the back of her, a witness phoned the police and said she reversed into me, where do i stand, any help would be much appreciated

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Your neighbour is being very naughty - but this is not unusual. First of all make sure your insurer gets the details of that witness from the police. I also think your insurance company should ask your neighbours insurer a few questions eg: how did you "drive into" your nieghbour? Usually the area of damage does not prove who is at fault - it doesn't prove who hit whom, it meanly proves there was contact of some kind.

However, this might be an exception. Presumably the damage to your car is on the side and somewhere on the rear on your neighbours car? If the damage is to the rear of your neighbours car then it proves she was reversing and therefore at fault. But that aside the fact is; if you are established on a road you have the right of way: and therefore you can't be guilty of "driving into her" if she was exiting her drive way or a side street or whatever. Any insurance company will tell you that if you are reversing and you hit anything then you will be at fault.

Kate 4 years ago

Hi, I was driving along a narrow, one way, 30mph road which is relatively straight but with a continual gentle right bend at around 20 - 25mph when I collided with a car pulling out of a car park. It was daytime, dry with light cloud cover.

Access to the car park is by a small alley-like turning on the RHS about half way along the street and I couldn't say if there is any give-way sign-age in the alley but it is considered a give way junction on to the main road I was driving along. There is street parking along the RHS either side of the car park entrance/exit with a high wall on the LHS and a car was illegally parked on the yellow lines just before the junction on my approach obscuring the view for both me and the third party.

On approach I saw the junction was clear (although I did not say this to the police as I was in shock and thought it obvious)and I continued to drive past. As I was starting to drive past the junction or maybe just a couple of feet before it I saw the third party car in the corner of my eye in the window by the door mirror lurch out of the junction and then slow I guess as though edging past the obstruction. I emergency braked but hit her within a split second, headlight to headlight. I don't know if I hit the side of her headlight or if she hit the side of mine. The damage to mine seems to be more on the side but I guess that could be the impact either way. The 3rd party woman the lost control of her car, veered onto the main road heading towards the LHS then seemed to over-steer right to correct herself and hit the building on the RHS of the road just after the car park. I came to a stop maybe up to 4 feet from the junction.

Nobody was injured, the ambulance and police attended and both left satisfied that no further action by them needed to be taken.

The 3rd party was an elderly lady, and this may seem ageist but I saw a little old lady and tried to help her as best I could, making sure she was okay, giving her a phone etc. I was very shaken by the whole thing and when she then turned on me, told me I was speeding, that she'd never had an accident in all her years and became generally rude and blame-full I felt very bad.

I gave a weak account to the police because I felt sorry for her, told them she was going slowly and edging out because that was what she told me she was doing and neglected to say that I felt she pulled out on me and that the junction was clear on approach. She told them she had edged out carefully, I was speeding and came along the road so quickly that she had no chance to react to me and that I hit her with such force it pushed her into the building. I was so shaken I must have looked very guilty and, bar the allegation of speeding did not really defend my case.

The semi-witnesses I spoke to were of the opinion that she hit me but didn't really see the accident and so their details weren't taken. The driver of the car obstructing the view of the junction may have witnessed the accident but only spoke to the third party (who reliably informed her that I was speeding) before leaving the scene without leaving details.

What I would want to know is if there is any way the third party can lay a portion of the blame on me with my shaky account of myself and the fact that there are no reliable witnesses?

Thank you for your help and apologies for the extremely long account!


Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello Kate.

You were on a road, right? She was exiting a car park trying to get onto the road you were on, right? Then she is at fault. You have the right of way. What you say or don't say at the scene of the accident wont be held against you. The TP might try to make something out of it but your insurer wont (or they certainly shouldn't) make a decision about who was at fault based on what you said at the time. Your insurer will recognise that you were shaken up, feeling guilty or even threatned by TP aggressive attitude (I've known cases where people in your position were made to sign a confession that they were at fault!).

How fast you were going is beside the point. The TP doesn't know how fast you were going and even if you were doing 100 mph you still had the right of way. She might say that she took great care in edging out - well in that case how did she manage to hit you? She wasn't careful enough. Forget the witness, if they didn't actually see it then their opinion will be discounted. Also you say her view of the junction was obstructed by another vehicle again, that is a fact in your favour. Also the area of damage (if it is to the side of your heaflight) would indicate that she ran into you and not vis versa.

Kate 4 years ago

Thank you

donna 4 years ago

I was reversing out of my drive and the road was clear, as I turned onto the road a car came round the corner fast and my rear passnger side hit the drivers door of the passing vehicle. The driver said I did see you but thought u would stop. Who is at fault. In my opinion when I hit the drivers side door the driver was trying to slip passed me without due care and attention. If it was a case of me not looking surley I would have hit her front bumper. She tried to avoid me rather than give way ?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

You are at fault. That is because:

You were reversing and as such the onus is on you to carry out the manoeuvre safely without putting other road users at risk. You cannot expect other road users to take avoiding action or even to give way because for one thing they have the right of way and for another they cannot be expected to know what you are doing or about to do. The fact the you hit her on the side merely reinforces my point because it shows that she was passing you when you hit her and your (and her) insurer will ask why didn't you wait for her to pass before completing your manoeuvre? They will also tell you that though you thought the road was clear you should have checked again (and again) to make sure that it remained clear while you were reversing out onto the road. You see the fact is the other driver "thought" you would stop but only you knew what you were going to do and therefore it was your responsibility to take the guesswork out of it for her. In my view she was entitled to "slip" past you and it was you who failed to show "due care and attention".

I suppose there is a remote possibility however that your insurance companies might decide that both of you were at fault but that would depend entirely on how close the corner was to the point of impact. Was it close? Could it be argued that she wasn't prepared for the unexpected acround the corner? Even if blame is shared the vast bulk of the portion will still fall on you because you were reversing and created the risk. That in my view is the crux of the matter.

Jenni 4 years ago

I was parked in a loading bay having delivered some items. A driver parked at my rear, inches from my bumper because I was parked on the far end of the bay and any vehicles behind me would be illegally parked on chevrons tapering to the corner of a road) The vehicles also parked away from the curbside so completely invisible through my rear view mirrors. When pulling away I had to reverse back slightly and knocked the cars bumper as it was impossible to see it was there. The driver blared his horn and I stopped. I, together with the driver who admitted that he parked so close (because he did not think I would need to reverse) examined the bumper to find two small clips had come undone on the centre rail of the bonnet which had been nudged by my rear shelf) otherwise no scratches or dents whatsoever. The driver drove directly to an auto-repair centre who thought there was no damage and refixed the clips. The driver however is now asking me for £700 as he claims he needs a new bumper!!

keyla 4 years ago

If the a car is coming down a Hill

A hits you while u are parking your car on the side of the road whos at fault

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello Jenni...

I hope you have reported this incident to your insurance company because they should be dealing with this claim. They should challenge the estimate and demand to see a copy of it. Better still they should get an engineer round to check the car's real damage and agree any costs and pay them for you. refitting the bumper onto a new set of clips is not going to cost £70 let alone £700! You are, I'm afraid, at fault for reversing into the car but if the cost is under your excess you will end up paying it yourself anyway but all the same your insurance company should be looking after you here.

But whatever you do, don't be persauded into paying anything to anyone without talking to your insurance company. The car driver might want to insist that you do but you don't have to. tell them to report it to their insurance company who will in all probability recommend that he take his car to an "insurance approved" garage.

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello Keyla,

If you were manoeuvreing your car into a parking space and you were in the road at the time then you would be.

keyla 4 years ago

No I was not in the road just my front end was and he hit my front end and my car was not in motion

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

If you were stationary and, in effect parked, then you would not be at fault though I have to warn you there is nothing to stop the other driver from claiming that you were moving away from where you had parked at the side of the road and drove into him. And vis versa... if you were moving (tho I know you weren't) and you did hit him there would be nothing to stop you from saying; "i was parked up, ok not very well I admit, but I was parked and stationary when he drove into me." In this particular case this might end up as a split liability claim. However, if you told your insurance company you were still in the car at the time this could be interpreted as meaning that you must, therefore, have been moving in/out of your parking space and certainly if the other drivers inrance finds out that's how they will view it. It is unlikely but the area of damage might show who hit whom. If the damage to the other car is on the side it would suggest you drove into them as they passed by. But on the otherhand if the damage is to the front of their car it only shows that their was an accident but doesn't show who hit whom. Regardless of what happened I think you will be found at fault merely because the other driver can so easily say that you moved from your parking space directly into his path and I think you will have difficulty in proving that you didn't. Even a best case scenario would mean a split liabilty decision whereby both insurance companies agree to share the blame (on your behalf!) since what really happened can't be established beyond any doubt.

keyla 4 years ago

My damage is on the side of my car and his is in the front of his car. Thank u for the advise im going to get a lawary

Kim 4 years ago

I wanted to make a U-turn because I had missed my turn so I first parked in an available parking space to let the other cars pass before making my move. I parked with my front wheel a little bit turned and protruding into the road a little bit and 3 cars went past without a problem, however the fouth car managed to hit me with the side of her car. The rear left door of the other car managed to scratch my front bumber and then their rear bumber clipped my front bumber and there was damage to my right head-light and indicator. She was going so fast in a 30mile zone and I think she must have been too close behind the car in front of her that she managed to hit me because 3 cars had just driven past me without hitting me, she only managed to stop after about 20-30metres and then she reversed, parking her car right in the middle of the road without even putting her hazards on and disregarding other drivers. She then asked for my insurance details but I was in too much shock to ask for hers but I managed to get her name and registration number. So who is at fault, please help because I am kind of confused now because I had thought that I was in the right since I was stationery and getting but indicating to get out of the parking.

Claire 4 years ago

I was parked on a red route no engine on lady reversed into side of drivers door told me she would pay went and got quotes now she's saying she carnt afford it and going to her insurance where do I stand I have my partner as a witness

Reinhard Beck. 4 years ago

Hello Kim.

This sounds very much like the situation Keyla was facing (see above). She too was parked at the side of the road with the front of her stationary car protruding out into the road...and I'm going to have to tell you what I told her. Because although you are not blame you will, in my view, be held at fault simply because the other driver can all to easily say you moved out into their path as they drove by. Plus the area of damage would seem to confirm that. The problem you have is that there is no way you can prove that in fact you were stationary added to which the fact that you were behind the wheel simply strangthens the case against you: if you were in the car you must have been driving it (in other words it will be seen as evidence that you were moving). You really need an indep witness here but it doesn't sound like you have one.

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello Claire.

I have no idea what a "red Route" is. However, it sounds as if the lady who reversed into you has admitted liability. Has she told her insurance company? Have you rung yours? What should happen is that the cost of the repairs are paid for by the other insurance company. They might even ring you and "offer their services" which simply means that they will deal with you direct and offer to repairs your car and provide you with a hire car without you having to contact your own insurance company. Your partner doesn't count as a witness as he wouldn't be considered "indep". People unfortunately offer to pay for repairs quite often...until they discover just how expensive that can be!

Emma 4 years ago


I was reversing out of a Garage and 2 cars were parked tightly on either side of me so I reversed straight back until I could see that bolth sides of the road were clear. I had stopped and was half way on both sides of the road over both sides of the white line, put my indicator on to travel right and a Car came around the corner also travelling right. I was blocking both sides of traffic so she came to a complete stop. I then went to travel right as intended and she decided to go ahead again also. we crashed! She said she did stop but decided then to go again as she thought it would take me "half an hour" to move - which is what she said to me on the phone. Can you help me out? who is at fault?

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hi Emma.

This is a tricky one. The rule is that if you are reversing onto a road and you hit another car on the road then you are deemed you are at fault regardless of how much care you took and how carelessly the other driver might have been. However, you were stationary when the other car appeared and she stopped too. Now, if you moved off and then she decided to as well and hit you that would put her at fault. However, all she has to do is tell her insurance company that you reversed into her path to put the blame at your door. what may help you though is the area of damage. If the damage to your r/o/s lets say that would suggest she rear ended you( and that her area of damage is to the front of her car. If the damage to her car is along the side and is a long scratch say rather than a dent it would sugget you backed into her as she passed by). Basically, you need to convince your insurer, and more importantly hers, that you were established on the road; that means you were on the road, clearly facing the direction you intended to travel then you have a good chance of convincing the respective insurance companies that you are not at fault. But otherwise (if you cant show you were established on the road and that the damage to your car is to the rear). My guess though is that you'll struggle to convince your insurer (and hers). So when you speak to your insurer. Be precise and exact in the info you give them.

Lisa 4 years ago

On sat I turned left into a road and there were cars parked on the left so the driver in front was in the middle of the road trying to pass. I stopped, there was an oncoming car so the driver in front of me reversed and hit my car.i hooted for him to stop. He then moved and the car was able to pass and the driver who hit me moved and parked further up, I followed and stopped, the cars behind me drove passed so no witnesses, he wouldn't give insurance details as wanted to do it himself, I took reg down and photographed damage and exchanged name and no, he only took my name and no down. He called later and wanted to go through the insurance, I said fine then he starts blaming me! He has now told his insurance company I went into him! I have a 4x4 and if I did the damage would be a lot where as its scratched down the back left corner above the wheel arch and his back bumper, mine is just my front right bumper, the paint has been scratched! He is 100% lying! I don't want to loose my 10 years no claims!! Any advice really appreciated!

Mrs K 4 years ago

Here's a puzzler for you....

I was pulling out of a side road turning left onto main road (2 way traffic)

Having checked my way forwards was clear, I was just checking to my right again as I pulled onto main carriageway. As I looked forwards and left again there was suddenly a reversing vehicle - although I stopped immediately he hit my front left bumper & the whole bumper assembly & headlight was shunted 2 inches to the right.

Basically the van driver had overshot the turning, and decided to reverse (at speed) rather than continuing the 200 yards to a roundabout to come back again from the other direction.

Little or no damage to his vehicle - I took a couple of photos at the scene, despite being in shock.

He disputed liability, my insurers went for 50:50. Damage to my car a genuine £2000 as needed whole bumper & headlight. His insurer claimed for £1200 damage - no idea what that was, I did question this with my insurer but to no avail.

what would you say regarding liability?

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hi Mrs K. I can guess what the van driver told his insurer...namely that he was minding his own business on the main road when suddenly you "raced" out of the side street and turned onto the main road and hit him in the rear. The problem for your insurer is that they have no way of disproving his side of the story and what's does sound very plausible. You're lucky to get 50: 50. I know you don't feel lucky but the circumstances and areas of damage would back his version of events even if in this case they aren't true. As a driver you have to bear in mind that it is up to you to be aware of what's going on around you (not always easy) but you also have to do other people's thinking for them. So in this case you unfortunately failed to consider the possibility that something like this might happen! (Silly you!) But daft as it sounds when it comes to (quite literally) the crunch that is what it comes to. Since neither driver can agree on what happened the insurance companies settle on the best (and cheapest) terms they can.

- as for his damage or lack of it, I take your point but you have to assume that the motor engineer who inspected his van wont authorise any repairs unless completely justified (and your own insurer can ask to see this authorisation and check but they hardly ever do as a professional courtesy. And it is true that often there is no visible damage but there could be internal damage. Finally, the van driver as an employee has every incentive to blame you. He might worry about his job if he starts costing his employer money by pranging the company vehicle.

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hi Lisa...

Oh dear, you are in a bit of a fix and I'm afraid there is nothing you can do about it because the accident circumstances do make it look as if you really did hit him in the rear. You either need a witness or (but only if you are extremely lucky) the evidence of the damage to your car and his suggets that he reversed into you - this might be proved if the damage to his car is more severe than to your car. Driving into something causes more damage that being driven into esp if you are stationary at the time. See what your insurer has to say about it.

Mrs K 4 years ago

What I didn't mention for sake of being brief is that I did have some very poor quality CCTV footage showing his van driving past the car-park turning & then reversing, though sadly not clear enough to identify his van with number plate. I gave this to my insurers (twice! as after they had reviewed it they passed it on to his insurers who said but there's nothing on the usb stick. Funnily enough it didn't go missing the second time i sent it). The footage also showed that after the accident he then proceeded to turn around in the road to go into the carpark I was exiting. Perhaps that explained my "good luck" in getting 50:50

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello again Mrs K...

To be blunt I don't think you'll get anywhere. However (and it's a BIG however because it all depends on how good your claims advisor is and how co-operative the other insurance company's claims advisor is too;

But it sounds to me that no one is disputing that you two hit each other. So where was the van driver going? Did he know the area? If the answer is "no" then (maybe) your version of events sounds more plausible. Ok so you can't make out the van's reg number but the CCTV does show it is his van? Can you describe him and it? What you need to try and get to happen is for the van driver's insurance company to ask him direct: is that your van? where you driving it? where were you drivng to at the time (on a job?) and so it must be you we see reversing in that grainy film? Yes or no?

christina schiavone 4 years ago

What happens if I stopped at stop sign and proceeded slowing to inch my way out.. my view was blocked by parked cars and by the time we saw each other the other car slammed into my front passenger side door and wheel and bumper..Who is at fault..

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Christina,

You are I'm afraid. It is your responsiblilty to move out onto the main street unless it is safe for you to do so. Now eventho your vision was obscured that is not a mitigating factor (quite the reverse - your view was blocked so your maneouvre was always going to be risky no matter how careful you were). The other driver on the other hand has the right of way and therefore, priority. So like I say, you are at fault.

John Anderson 4 years ago


I was in a side street with designated parking bays on both sides of the road, the bays on my side were full. On other side of the road there was 4 bays, one car parked in the 1st bay and other in the last bay, I indicated to enter one of the middle bays and started to move into the bay, when the car who was parked in the 1st bay reversed back, i seen this and slammed on my breaks and stopped but it was too late the car collided with my car. There was damage to my drivers door and her rear drivers bumper. We exchanged details and she offered to pay for the damage to my car. A couple of days later she called me and said that i performed an illegal manover and that she was taking this through the insurance as i was to blame, what is your thoughts on this? John, from Manchester.

reinhard beck 4 years ago


Actually you are both at fault. I dealt with a very similar scenario when I was working as a claims advisor in which a driver had pulled up to park at the side of the road and had then decided to move up to the rear of the car parked a couple of spaces ahead of him. But at that very moment a van driver did what you did and tried to nip into those spaces from the other side of the road. I think the split will be something like 70: 30 against you though. Thats not because you made an illegal manoeuvre (that doesn't really come into it). But you both should have looked. remember you drive at your own just covers you when that risk doesn't pay off! That's why your policy will cover you even if you were a bit naughty and did something you shouldn't have. Don't forget your policy covers you for "accidental damage" even if that accidental damage was caused by you taking a chance.

dave 4 years ago

i was following a 4 x 4

we reached a cross road and she turned right.

i approched the cross road, checked both ways and began crossing

as i was crossing i see the 4 x 4 out of the corner of my eye slam on her breaks and begin reversing towards me.

i pressed my horn and tryed to reverse back, the driver scuffed the side of her 4 x 4 across the front of my car breaking the bumper and grills.

who is at fault?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Dave,

She will be. She reversed into you. You will have to hope though that's what she tells her insurance company. There is nothing to stop her putting you at fault by saying that you ran into her ( that does happen you know).

ndakola 4 years ago

I have third party fire and theft insurance. I was driving along a main road, and a car which had been waiting in a side road (with dotted lines across and a yield sign) suddenly pulled out to turn right across the main road and hit my car on the passenger side. My car is a write off.

The other party claims that she was in the right to pull out because an oncoming vehicle in the other direction on the main road flashed his lights to tell her to pull out. She also claims that I swerved onto the other side of the main road (ie where, as she has already stated, there was oncoming traffic).

The damage to my car shows clearly that the front of her car hit the side of mine.

Her insurance wants a 50 50 split, because there were no witnesses, though she acknowledges that she pulled out of the side road.

Is there any reason why I should accept this?

reinhard beck 4 years ago


Don't accept 50:50. You are not at fault in any way whatsoever!! You have the right of way. What is more she is in a side road that has a "give way" markings...and that is exactly what she should have done!

You don't need witnesses! What is more the area of damage proves what happened and she admits its. It is always the responisibilty of a driver exiting on to a main road to make sure it is safe for them to do so. That fact that she hit you merely proves that it wasn't safe. It it makes no difference how you were driving. You could have been drunk with both feet resting on the dashboard eating a sandwich...she would still be at fault. no...don't accept 50:50. Do you have legal expenses cover with your policy? If you do your insurer will provide a solicitor for you to argue your case against her insurer. Even if you don't your insurer still might help and put in a phone call for you. Find out.

Jodie G 4 years ago

My step daughter had an accident a few months ago, the other party have now decided to claim through the courts. They were both travelling along a single track country lane and hit each other on a blind bend. The other party was able to get out of the car and take photos etc whilst my step daughter was in great pain. The other party said it was knock for knock, as did the police. My stepdaughter informed her insurers of this and has heard no more from them. Now her insurance has expired and the other party has filed a claim at court and has stated that her vehicle was stationary. What's going on? Can my stepdaughter still claim on her expired insurance or use the legal expenses that came with her insurance to get a solicitor?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Jodie,

It isn't knock for knock. Usually people who say that mean its a disputed liability claim - where both sides share the blame and the costs of the claim. (Knock for knock is very rare. It only applies in cases where an accident happened due to unforseen circumstances; eg, both drivers swerved to avoid something on a road and as a result hit each other. Each driver then makes a fault claim on his/her insurance for the damage to their car). In a disputed claim for eg: a claim is settled 60:40 in car A's favour. It means the insurer of car A pays half of the 60% other sides costs and half of their own 40%. And this is the accident your daughter had. No one really knows what happened because the only two people who were there cannot agree so insurance companies with settle on a disputed claim basis.

What kind of insurance did your daughter have at the time? Even if it was only TPO her insurer at the time will pay their share to the other side. In other words if the claim is settled 50/50 and the damage to the over vehicle comes to £1000 your daughters ex-inurer is obliged to pay £500. In a knock for knock claim each side would pay for the damage to their own cars. I don't understand why this is going to court. There were no witnesses. The photos will prove nothing.

Paul 4 years ago

I was in a right hand lane going to turn right into a side street the lane looked like a filter lane, my light was green as a moved forward my friend in the passenger seat screamed stop so i slammed my blakes on.. it was dark and wet the nose of my care was hanging in to the other lane the driver approaching had plenty of time to see me as i had checked beforehand. The driver of the other car was smoking and apparently beeped his horn and seamed to be travelling more than 30mph.. he hit my car on the left hand side just in front of the left wheel and turned my about 45 degrees. The other driver defiantly had space to move over and past me however he hit me. I dont know if he was speeding up to go through the amber light but i cant prove this. Who is at fault?

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hi Paul.

You are I'm afraid. Sure you were stationary but as you say it was dark and wet and it would have been just as hard to stop as it was for you.

Worse, the front of your car was "hanging" in his lane. You were obtructing him not other way around expecting him to brake suddenly or take avoiding action would asking him to take avoiding action that is potentially dangerous. It does not matter that he was smoking (that didn't cause the crash) nor does it matter what speed he was going (you can't prove how fast he was going (and that didn't cause the crash either) and whether or not his lights alowed him to go again; you can't prove that either. The person really at fault was your passanger.

Sammi 4 years ago

Just a quick question I had an accident and because the insurers were sister companies they split the liability and gave both parties back half of their excess. However now I'm applying for a new policy & there are no options for this type of settlement only driver at fault or driver not at fault. What am I supposed to pick?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello sammi,

Are you in the uk by the way. I'm not sure I quite understand you question. If you have a look at my other hubs it explains the difference between comprehensive, TPF&T & TP only cover. In a nut shell all of these policies fully protect you against liability from a third party but the level of cover your cover has varies (Comp = full, tpf&t = limited and tpo = no cover for your car). Now if you have an an accident the cirxs determine if both drivers are partially to blame or not. I don't see how an insurer can give you the option of just non-fault or fully at fault. What if your insurer deems an accident as non-fault but the other side say "no its 50/50". Anyway in the example you gave just because the 2 companies involved were "sisters" that shouldn't be the reason why they settled it as a "split claim" which is wrong. Sounds to me this could be a case for FOS to look at. All insurers have to abide by stringent rules laid down by FSA one of which is that all policyholders are treated fairly and it doesn''t sound to me like you were.

vanessa rivers 4 years ago

hello i was in a car crash that involved 3 other cars. There was one main car at fault that hit the truck that hit me. I was the therd car to get hit. I was at a stop light making a left hand turn. i was not in motion i was at a red light waiting for it to turn green when the man that was making a ri ght hann turn got hit from behind when he hit my car in the front corner making me fly 50 feet into a parking lot! Whos insurence should i speek to and who will be responsable for my car mefical bills ext... for the crash... The guy that started it or the guy ghat hit me...

hy 4 years ago

hello i was in a car crash that involved 3 other cars. There was one main car at fault that hit the truck that hit me. I was the therd car to get hit. I was at a stop light making a left hand turn. i was not in motion i was at a red light waiting for it to turn green when the man that was making a ri ght hann turn got hit from behind when he hit my car in the front corner making me fly 50 feet into a parking lot! Whos insurance should i speek to and who will be responsible for my car mefical bills ext... for the crash... The guy that started it or the guy ghat hit me...

reinhard beck 4 years ago


I'm correct to assume these other vehicles were "oncoming" traffic? The vehicle that hit the truck that then hit you is at fault. As you say the guy that started it is at fault.

Warren 4 years ago

Hello, I just had a crash and want absolute certification that it was not my fault and the best course of action to take.

I was on a main 40 mph road. Ahead of me was a side street and a car was edging out of it a few feet to turn right. I pulled out a bit to go around his nose, however my car did not go onto the other side of the road to do so, as there was a little middle section of the road for cars wishing to turn right. As I started to go around the nose of his car, he pulled out and started making his right turn and I applied my brakes. I went into him at approximately 30 mph after my thinking distance and the amount of brakes I had a chance to apply. My car looks like it will be a write off. His has a dented side and headlight. My air bags and job lot went off it was quite shocking.

Immediately after getting out of the car the man was raising his arms and shouting "what were you thinking!" and I was just too shocked to say anything. Afterwards he calmed down and we exchanged details.

So I went into him as I did not have enough time to slow down after he had pulled out. However as he was edging his way out and I went around his nose, I am slightly concerned that it could be deemed my fault because I should have slowed down and let him out instead of choosing to go around the nose of his car.

My insurance company has asked if I had injuries. Both my and my passengers injuries are minor and can be practically solely described as bruising of the chest from the air-bag and my passengers knee and my finger from impact wounds. I have told the legal team this. Should I drop this as my injuries are insignificant or would I still receive compensation no matter how slight my injuries were?

Another thing is I have a witness to the accident. Would you recommend that he gets involved?

If the third party refuses to admit liability and it gets deemed as "a both drivers at fault situation" or worse "my fault" should I contest it?

Many thanks

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago


This is very straight forward. You are not at fault...he is. He may contest liability but the fact is he was exiting a side road when he shouldn't have done. You have right of way. He should give way to you not the other way around. The fact that you were unable to stop in time merely confirms the obvious...that the other driver was at fault.

Don't convince yourself that you are partially at fault because you failed to slow down or failed to do this or is all irrelevant. He should have given way to you. End of story.

Taking a statement from a witness who saw the iccident wont do any harm though it shouldn't be necessary. I would expect the other drivers insurer to tell him what I am telling you. If you have suffered an injury then say so. It may be minor but what about later?

Bill 4 years ago


I checked both ways and it seemed clear. So I turned left out of a side street. I then began signalling right as the right turn I wanted to take was coming up quite quickly. Within about 20 metres I passed a small island on my right and maneuvered into an extra lane (immediately after the island) that is designtaed for turning right (which is what I was going to do).

Then, having entered the turning right lane, and as I was about to turn right (the road was clear) into another side road, I looked in my mirron and I felt a bang in the back of my car.

A motorbike had tried to overtake, and hit me on the outside back bumper of my car.

I pulled up and thankfully he had no injuries. However there is damage to his bike. My car had just small/minor damage to the back bumper.

Where is the blame here?

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello Bill,

When the moter bike hit you were you stationary? Did he hit you on the rear bumper? Because if the answer is "yes" to both then the bike is at fault. I'm asking because you go on to say he was 'attempting' to overtake you. That suggests you were starting to make your turn as he began to overtake in which case the damage to your car would have been on the rear right on the side somewhere? But if that is the case he would still be at fault since he was coming from behind you and overtaking. Also if he was attempting to overtake he must have been straying over onto the other side of the road driving into oncoming traffic. So again he was trying to over take at the wrong time and the wrong place. Be warned though you might be forced into having to accept a split liability claim on this by the bike rider arguing that if indeed you looked in your mirror you should have seen him and let him past before you before you started to turn right into the side street. But for your part you should maintain that you were; stationary, and in a lane designated for traffic wanting to turn right and in attempting to overtake the bike rider was straying onto the wrong side of the road (if that is the case) and since he was coming from behind you it was his responsibility to be aware of the road ahead.

Bill 4 years ago

Thanks for the quick response. I was not stationary, but moving forward slowly preparing to turn right. He did indeed hit my back bumper on the right side of it. But it was my back bumper and not the right of my car.

The lane I was in is separate from the normal lane you would use to go straight ahead, and is there for vehicles to use to turn right (it is not a dual carriageway).

the motorbike driver even said to me he didn't realise I would turn right and was trying to go around me. Although he said this was to avoid a collision, which I feel means he was driving too fast and too close to me, rather then keeping a safe distance. He said that because I pulled out of the side road he couldn't stop in time. Although considering the amount of distance I had travelled between turning out and moving into the right hand lane to turn off, and at that point being hit from behind, I don't feel his reasoning can 'hold up' or is satisfactory for the blame to be put on me...?

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hello again Bill,

Taking your last point first it seems to me that you must have travelled some distance and some time must have passed when you exited the side street drove to the centre lane and started turning right...plenty of time for the bike rider to size up the situation and behave other words he should have stayed behind you (if he had time to make the decision to overtake you he then also had enough time to slow down and assess the situation). If he didn't realise that you were going to turn right then why did he try to overtake you? It was his responsibility to wait and until he was sure what you were going to do. though I suspect you might be told that it will be a split claim (with most of the fault laying with him) because- a) you were moving and b) you didn't check behind you to make sure it was safe to start your right turn. However, since you were hit in the rear bumper settles it in your favour (had the damage been to the side of your car points 'a' and 'b' would apply). He might also try and argue that when you exited out of the side street it forced him to take avoiding action that led to the accident. But he can't prove that was the case and it is irrelevent if you can demonstrate that you were established on the rd.

Mrs S 4 years ago

I had to reverse out of a narrow road onto another road (not a major road just a residential quiet street) as i could not turn round with it being a dead end and parked cars down one side. I have done this numerous times and do so carefully given that cars may be driving down the adjourning road. The lighting was very dim and upon reversing I reversed into a dark coloured vehicle which was parked directly opposite the junction I was reversing out of. Am I at fault if he was parked illegally? I am guessing so!

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Mrs S,

You guessed right. Most of the questions I've answered so far can be summed up as:

1) You're always at fault if you are reversing

2) even if the other car/driver was parked illegally or doing something wrong (eg: driving irratically).

3) and even if your vision was obscured.

sg 4 years ago

If I am on a road and miss my right turn I check to make sure the road is clear then reverse back to enable me to turn right, a car comes out of the turn on the right whilst I am reversing and drives into the rear of my van?!? Who is at fault as I was reversing but they pulled onto main road off a side road!??!

4 years ago

Hi, I was in an accident where by I was on a lane heading straight while keeping a safe distance from the car ahead of me, while the other person was on the lane heading left, he then decided to swerve in the gap with out indicating, as a result I have minor scratches on my back right hand side the bumper, while he has scratches on the left hand side starting from the wheel to the edge of the bumper. he is now claiming that I had hit him in the back and unfortunately when the incident occurred i did not take pictures of his position as he had moved forward, could i argue from the position of the scratches he was not infront of me???

Shan 4 years ago

I was moving along a single carriage way in very slow traffic backed up all along the road. I wanted to turn right into my estate and when I reached the turning lane in the middle of the road I pulled into it (obviously signalling that I wanted to do this). A car ahead of me decided they no longer wanted to wait in the queue of traffic and tried to make a right hand turn without seeing me already in the turning lane. The front right side wing of their car hit the front left side wing of my van the wing mirrors on both vehicles where damaged too. Obviously this was the other drivers fault as I was already in the turning lane, but they are claiming its my fault. There was another member of the drivers family in a vehicle further behind and they are claiming a cut into the diagonal lines before the turning lane. I 100% didn't but even if I had the diagonal lines an advisory and in a line of traffic I am sure I would have been in the right to use the diagonal lined area to move into the turning lane - I want to state again I waiting until the arrows directed me over but their argument would not stand anyway? The driver of the car obviously didn't look before moving as I was alongside them and they pulled into me. I have no witness. I was pulling into my estate as I have done for 20yrs and they decided to take the turn as an alternative to waiting in the heavy traffic. What are my chances of proving I am not at fault and it was 100% the other drivers error.?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 4 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello SG,

It all comes down this. You will be held at fault because you were reversing. However, if it can be established that you were reversing before the other driver exited the side street then he will be at fault. That is because he should have seen what you were doing and should have stayed where he was. But if he had already exited and was on the road behind you before you started to reserve then you're at fault.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 4 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Shan,

Have I got this right. You moved into a "turning Lane" in the middle of the road and in doing so drew along side the car that had been ahead of you in this stationary line of traffic. You were stationary waiting to make your turn into your street when the car that had been ahead of you decided to make the same maneouvre as you and in the process hit you. If that is what happened he is at fault. The problem is, as you suspect, going to be tricky because he will perhaps say that he was already moving into the "turning lane" when you decided to move along side him trying to get to it too. But he can't prove that either.

So in reality what your respective insurers will do is call it a draw. I can't see how you will be able to convince your insurer (and remember they have to convince the other drivers insurer as well) that you had moved into the "turning lane" first and was staionary when the impact occurred. The other drivers' witnesses wont help him as they wont be independent and its debatable how much they saw anyway. I think you will have to resign yourself to a 50/50.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 4 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello S,

Unfortinately...No. if anything the area of damage on his car would confirm his version of events: that he was ahead of you when you decided to move into his lane.

Shell09 4 years ago

Hi I was hit from behind while stopped end of traffic que red light. Third party exchanged ins details with me but is now telling insurers he has no idea what I'm talking about he was never at the scene neither was his car!

The insurance details are correct for the car but I don't have photos or independent witness

My mum n 7 yr old were in the car

Will he get away with this? What's to stop everybody just claiming they know nothing n wasn't there?! This had been going on since June 30th :-(

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Shell09

But you have all his details. Your insurer should insist on an inspection of his car to at least show that he was in an accident. Your insurer will need the co-operation of the the other drivers insurance company on this. They need to be persuaded that he did hit you in the rear. any why wouldn't they? how else would you have got his details?

Hi 4 years ago

Hi there, I was driving on a main road when an ambulance with its lights flashing approached the nction, I stopped to allow it to pass and the vehicle behind hit me - my rear bumper was damaged as was his front bumper I also suffered injury. he now claims it was my fault saying that I was reversing. Please can you ell me where I stand?

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Ha! That old chestnut. Well, as far as I'm concerned that wont wash. And no self resecting claims advisor will swallow that one either. The fact is the evidence shows you were hit in the rear. unless the other driver has real and solid proof that you reversed into him he will be found at fault. The only exception might be if you were stationary on a hill and rolled backwards when you started mving again as can happen. But here? No. He's at fault.

SAmmmm 4 years ago


I was driving down a dual carriageway, and slowed down slowly to a stop, then a few seconds later someone clipped the back passenger side, he is saying its my fault, I think it's his as he hit me, had time to stop (as i did)or move into the other lane. So clearly he wasn't paying attention and apparently he had to swerve out the way. It was raining & at night if that makes any difference.

Thanks for any help

Robert 4 years ago


I was driving along a 2 way main road . On the other side of the road was a woman indicating right to turn into a side street on my left side . So the woman decided to make the turn across my path . So as she was turning into the side street i had no time to do anything apart from slam my brakes on it was raining so i just skidded towards her . I ended up hitting like the back left corner of her car on bumper . I caused damage on front left side panal upto my wheel arch. Now she is saying that she was already established in making the turn and it was my fault . If i wouldn't of slammed my brakes on i would have smashed the whole side of her car up. Is this really my fault? thanks

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Robert,

You are not to blame. It was you (not her) who was "established" on the road. You going straight on and since she was making a turn across your path it was her responsibility to make sure that it was safe for her to do so.

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Sammmm,

He's at fault for hitting you in the rear. It's as simple as that. He failed to keep his correct braking distance bt him and the traffic ahead of him

SAmmmm 4 years ago


Alison 4 years ago


Was on oneway road with parked cars both sides. Private taxi, passenger opens rear roadside door, takes of my mirror as I pass. Taxi driver said not his fault. How can it be my fault?

Robert 4 years ago


Debbie85 4 years ago

Hi, I was driving down a main road when I approached a mini roundabout, I needed to turn right so I signalled, checked other traffic, there was no one coming from my right, there was an oncoming car on the other side of the road but had not yet got to the roundabout, so I felt I was free to go. As I continued round the junction the oncoming car had approached the roundabout and failed to give way; as a result of this I collided into the other cars driver side wing. The damage to my car is on the front bumper, point of impact to the drivers side of the bumper. The other driver is blaming me for this accident, but I don't see how it can be. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, never been in an accident before and really worried.

Reinhard Beck 4 years ago

Hi Debbie85,

First of all Stop worrying. It's not worth it. Next, reading your comment am I right to assume that you entered the r-a-b at 6 o'clock (so to speak) and the other driver who hit you was approaching it from 12 'oclock? Then they are at fault. If you are on the r-a-b all other traffic wanting to join it have to give way to you. When you entered the r-a-b you checked right to make sure that side was clear...he should have done the same.

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Alison,

Potentially a tricky one this. The rule in this sort of scenario as far as insurance companies is this; If someone opens a door of car parked at the side of the road you will be considered at fault if the damage is to the front of you car (it assumes you saw the door being opened and therefore you should have enough time to stop before you hit it). If however the damage is to the side of your car they are considered to be at fault (they opened the door into your car as you passed by). In this case it sounds to me that the door was already open when you drove past. How else would they have hit your mirror? However I can also see that it could have happened as you drove past. In order words just as the front your car drew level with the rear passanger opened and knocked off your wing mirror. The only witness at the scene was the passanger who opened the door (and lets face it they might not remember the incident as you do). My best piece of advice I can give is this: don't bother claiming because I can see the 2 insurance companies settling on a 50/50 here. And in that case it wont be worth claiming as whatever the cost of your wing mirror is you will still have to pay 50% of your excess towards the cost. Likewise the taxi driver wont want to claim either if it goes 50/50. If you don't want to speak to him ask your insurer to speak to him on your behalf. On a final note: Do you or does he have your wing mirror? I assume the damage is on the front (which would suggest you ran into the open door) But where is the damage to the taxi's door? If it is on the inside of the door that again would suggest you hit the door when t was already open but if the damage is to the outside of the door or on the outside edge then that would suggest your version of events is correct. But like I said, best thing for both of you is not to pursue it.

Debbie85 4 years ago

Thank you, I know its just hard not to worry. Yes I entered the r-a-b at 6 o clock and the other driver entered opposite at 12 o clock. I know I had right of way and my insurance company are backing me, still worried as the other driver is not accepting liability, saying that he was on the r-a-b first, but I just can't see how this is possible as we collided as I was turning right round the r-a-b. I have done a bit of research which showed the majority of r-a-b accidents result in 50/50 liability which I think would be really unfair. There were no witnesses, so it is my word against his. Do you think this will be the case??

Alison 4 years ago

The damage to the door is at the edge of the door,passanger says she did look but didn't see me. Also said the door wasn't open that she opened it and hit me.

Don't know if this makes a differnce but taxi driver pulled in and parked on yellow zig zags about 2ft from pavement so when door was opened it would have been well onto the one way road.

Thanks anyway

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello again Alison,

Will the passanger be a witness for you. Because her version of events and the area of damage points to her (the taxi) being at fault. The passanger admits she looked (but didn't see you. That's her fault not yours). I doubt that where he parked will be relevant to be honest because it wasn't him parking there that caused the accident the accident was caused by the passanger opening the door.

reinhard beck 4 years ago


You're quite right very many accidents on r-a-b's do end up as 50/50. But that is usually involving 2 cars who have a collision when both are already on a r-a-b. But not accidents following your scenario. What's more the area of damage on both cars show that your version of events is correct. Of-course he'll say its not his fault (he doesn't want his premiums to go up does he). It's his insurance companys job to tell him that whether he likes it or not; he is at fault.

Emma 4 years ago

Hi, I would be most gratefull if you could help me on this one? The other day i was pulling out of a space on a main road to my left, i had to cross the lane of on coming traffic to get on the right side of the road. As i crossed the lane of on coming traffic which was clear i saw a car coming from my rear so edged out waiting for this car to pass me before i followed behind it. As i did this the car swerved to hit me yet i did not think it made any contact so just thought the driver and her passenger where trying to intimidate me,. especially as they were shouting and swearing at me, and carried on my way, meanwhile they pulled into a carpark.

When i arrived at my destination i thought i best check my car any way and saw that my front corner bumper had indeed been scrached and i was very annoyed i did not get their reg but to add to the anoyance the other driver has got my reg and told the police about the incident saying it was my fault! I am really upset and angry about this and just need to know if i have any hope of the police beleiving me as they where the ones that contacted them?

Debbie85 4 years ago

Thanks again!! Will post to let you know how I get on! Hopefully it will go in my favour. The TP insurance has been in touch with mine today to put in a claim against me as 'I failed to give way to him'... I don't understand in what version of events this could be the case.

Debbie85 4 years ago

So his insurance company has not done a good job to explain it was his fault :(

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Debbie85,

If his insurers are trying to argue it was your fault for not giving way they need to have a read of the Highway code. Traffic on the r-a-b has priority. It all depends on what version of events the third party has given his insurance company. But they need to explain if the damage to your car was at the front and the damage to his was on the side how that proves you are at fault for not giving way?

reinhard beck, 4 years ago

Hello Emma,

Sorry but you're at fault here. If you had to cross over the lane for oncoming traffic to reach the right side of the road it is your responsibility that it does imperil other road users travelling up and down that road. You were a hazard. However careful you think you were your manoeuvre put them (or made them feel that they were) at risk.

Alison 4 years ago

Thanks for you time. The damage to my car is on my drivers door before the mirror and the part that would hold the mirror to the car. My mirror got knocked off, hardly any damage to mirror its self.

My insurance want to claim 100% non fault on my side.

Was going to just fix my car but taxi driver claiming 100% my fault saying i drove into an open door. He has waited 4 days to lodged this.

I have no damage to my car at all infront, so i have no option but to let my insurance deal with it. Just as well i didn't fix my car the impact and red paint still showing on my door. Will just have to wait and see what happens.

Thanks again

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hello Alison,

Well, if there is bodywork damage as well it clearly shows that the taxi's passanger door was opened agst your car as you passed by. Of-course the taxi driver denys liability this fault claim on his policy will cost him a fortune in premiums. They pay thousands so I'm not exaggerating. Best thing for him to do is re-imburse your insurance company for the cost of repairing your car.

mark 4 years ago

Hi, i was driving on a single track road near my house and drove round quite a blind left hand corner. I know its blind so i edged round at about 20mph but as i was just getting round the corner i noticed a car coming towards me. i braked, stopped but as she was driving quite fast she skidded and hit the front of my car. She has left skid marks that measure 9m (30ft) which i have taken pictures of. she was braking for longer than this but that is the length of the black marks. she didn't admit it was her fault she blamed it on the wet road, it wasn't exactly wet. and she ;left black marks which you dont normally get when the road is wet. where do i stand?

many thanks

reinhard beck 4 years ago

hi mark,

The key words here are "blind corner" and "single track". Assume just for a moment that this single track was straight and you had this accident. It would go down as a split liability claim because you will blame her and she will blame you. Now add the blind corner to the mix. It doesn't get any better. She could say that it was only because you "sprang" into view around this blind corner that she was forced to apply the brakes making her skid and hence the crash. Unfortunately you wont be abel to prove that you were actually stationary or that she was going too fast for the type of road she was on and for the conditions and therefore the author or her own (and your) misfortune. In any case insurance companies never take speed into account as a factor since it can't be proven. This, I am sure will be settled as a split liability claim - you were driving around a blind bend and she was approaching it. It was a single tracked road. Both of you were aware of the risk but it didn't pay off. But that is what your insurance is pays for the consequences but don't expect your insurer to fight a battle they can't win. Your insurer may try and argue that you had stopped but you're sunk if the other side says you weren't and it was because you "came out of nowhere" that she had to slam on her brakes and hence the skid marks. You'll have to keep your fingers crossed that the other driver admits that you were stationary and that she was approaching the blind corner at a speed that made it impossible for her to take avoiding action if need be.

mark 4 years ago

ok thanks for your help

Sultan 4 years ago

Hi, I was undertaken by a driver and my car was hit from the rear side. I also have a witness. At the scene of the accident the other driver accepted liability. Later she changed her statement and claimed that I was the one who collided with her car. The insurance company has decided to go 50/50. But I disagree with this decision. Shall I accept their offer or go to court.

reinhard beck 4 years ago

Hi Sultan,

What is the other driver saying happened? Remember your insurer will only accept 50/50 if they have to. Now you say you have a witness, can't they corroborate your version of events? If you were hit in the rear then that would be hard for her to explain way as that would suggest she ran into you not vis-versa. If your damage is to the rear of your car how is she able to argue that you collided with her?

Ian 3 years ago

Hi, yesterday my girlfriend was involved in accident and we are arguing with our insurers about who is at fault.

She was travelling on a single carriageway country lane, the road was icy but she was driving safely. The road has a national speed limit road but she turned a blind, right hand corner only to be presented with stationary traffic in her lane. The road was icy so her vehicle didn't stop as expected and she went into the verge, avoiding the cars in front of her but rolled her car and we have been advised by the insurers approved garage that they will recommend to write the car off.

The insurance company admit she is not to blame but are claiming she is at fault for this accident because they are unable to reclaim their costs from another party -no other cars were hit.

Our view is that she is not at fault because she did everything that can be reasonably expected. She drove to the conditions and she could not have known about the stationary cars around the corner as she is unsighted.

Is there such classification as an accident - i.e. one in which no person was to blame?

Thanks in advance for your help.

reinhard beck 3 years ago


Your insurer is right. "Fault" does not mean that you did something wrong. So even if an accident can happen where no one is to blame the accident will still be "at fault" because your insurer cannot get their money back from someone else which means they will have to pay (in this case) for a new car. And that is the risk they took on when they agreed to insure your car (and the premium reflects how bad a risk they think you are...not meaning they think you are a bad driver but it includes the potential cost of any claim. The premium for a businessman driver a fast BMW will be much higher than the premium for a 10 yr old banger driven by an OAP once a week to the shops). But when you signed on the dotted line you also agreed that you drive "at your own risk" meaning that if the risk doesn't come off you will be covered but your insurer wont let you off because you tried your best. Your policy and the way the claim is dealt with is not a moral issue because that is an opinion. May be you did try your best and may be you didn't but you will still be covered. If you feel that this is unfair then what happens to your cover if the insurer can decide that in their view your g/f didn't do everything that "can be reasonably expected" - your policy wont be worth the paper it's written on. Insurers will say all the time to avoid a payout "sorry sir, but you didn't do your best to avoid the accident." And the argument you are having with them now will happen with everyone everytime there is a claim.

Elaine 3 years ago

Yesterday I was driving down a road to get to work and a car drove into me from a side street. Then another car behind me stopped and the driver said he had was a witness and an ex policemand and that I was speeding and it was all my fault. I was shocked and upset as the car drove into me and the damage was to my driving side. When I asked for the drivers details, the witness got involved and said they were getting the police and that I should be breathalyzed. I phoned the police myself as they were being quite rude at this point. When the police came they did not want to test me and said it was an insurance matter. The insurance company have said its the other drivers fault but the way the witness was talking and getting involved he made me feel like I deserved to be hit by the car and it was all my fault. I can't stop thinking about.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Elaine,

Relax. The other guy is at fault. You were on the main road and that always gives you priority. What speed you were going is utterly irrelevant. It wasn't your speed that caused the was the guy by exiting the side street when he did was the one who caused it. Besides, if you were speeding (which no one can prove anyway) why did the other driver exit the side street? If he knew that you were speeding why did he then take such a stupid risk and try to enter the main road. He should have waited to let you pass. Don't worry; you're insurance company is right.

Elaine 3 years ago

Thanks so much. It has been playing on my mind and I was starting to doubt myself. What a relief.

Lauren 3 years ago

Hi, I was in a private car park which has cars parked in a line behind each other on a hill. I was slowly edging back releasing my break a little at a time moved no more than 3ft and not onto the main road but into what effectively could have been anther parking space. a car then turned into the car park really fast attempting to park in the line next to me seen the car in front of her with its lights on swerved and the middle of her car has hit the left handside of my reg plate. Who is at fault? thanks

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Lauren,

I'm not sure I can picture the scene exactly. However, The car that swerved into you would normally be at fault here. Because it was her actions that caused the accident. But you were also reversing (albeit taking great care) and as such the other party could (perhaps legitimatelly) argue that you could not see what was going on ahead of you because you were reversing. Now, if I was your claims advisor I would put the case that you were not at fault because the other car even if you'd been travelling forwards you would have been in no position to anticipate let alone avoid the other driver. Trouble is though the other driver can make a meal of it and simply say you reversed into her so in the end you might be forced by your insurer having to accept a 50/50 settlement. If that is the case and the damage to both vehicles is very slight I would recommend that both of you not bother claiming at all. Even if yu have to pay for your own repairs it will be cheaper than going ahead with a claim that will cost both of you up to 2 ncb each and (possibly) an excess to pay if you do claim and depending on the cost of the repairs.

Sharon 3 years ago


I was wondering my husband had an accident which we believe was not his fault and was unavoidable but the insurance says otherwise and won't even investigate. We bought both our cars together from a main dealership we had numerous problems with both cars from day one and repeatedly took them back to have work done under warranty. We also had service plans and did everything we should to assure vehicles were maintained, m.o.t's, service etc. whilst driving home from work within speed limits my husband manovered out to pass a parked car as he did so the car juddered and pulled him to the right hitting another parked car ( which received very little damage) the steering rod? Had snapped and wheel turned out forcing car to veer to right uncontrolably. Insurance say as he hit a parked vehicle it's automatically his fault. Surly it isn't when it was faulty. M.O.T was 3 months previous nothing found. Where do we stand? Many thanks

kam 3 years ago

Hi, I was parked looked out my mirror and saw that there wasn't any cars coming opened my door to get out and while I was picking my bag up to get out a car came from a side street and went straight into my door. My door has nearly come off it's hinges and the other car is damaged at the front. Who is at fault? Please help.

Ricky 3 years ago


Today, I got into a minor accident, when entering the left turn lane for making a left turn.

As i was entering the left turn lane another vehicle hit me on the side of my driving wheel, causing a bender over wheel body.

That driver was driving illegally in the inside most lane and was not supposed to be in that lane(I was entering the left turn lane at that lane's start).

The other driver is now lying and saying that I changed my mind and entered the lane at a later point coming in his direct path. I am saying that because I was in front and because of the speed of his vehicle, it is obvious that he was driving illegally in that lane and hit me as I was about to enter the lane.

The car damage shows that he hit me at a higher speed suggesting that he did not entered the lane but was driving in that lane for at-least last 100 feet or more (which he was, and which is illegal).

Do you think I can prove his fault ? Please advice what are my best options? Should I accept a 50:50 split (he wants to split it evenly). I don't want my premium to rise because of his fault. Please advice.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Ricky,

Bit of a tricky one this. (i don't quite follow your descrition: if he was on the inside lane then he would have hit you on the passanger - the near side - not the drivers side) Having said that a 50/50 decision is your best bet. Because the simple fact is this: it was you that was making the manoeuvre and changing lanes which means it was your responsibility to check that it was safe for you to do so and that includes checking that there was no traffic behind you "illegally" and "speeding". You have to ask yourself this question: why did the accident happen. was because you changed lanes or was it because the other driver was in a lane he shouldn't have been in? The answer is; the accident happened because you were changing lanes. What makes it even worse for you is the area of damage. You say the impact was on your driving wheel (which I understand to mean the front offide). Now if it is on the front it shows that he was along side you when you started your move into that lefthand lane. If I was your insurance claims advisor I would say that if he didn't see him before you should have seen him then. A 50/50 split will be a good result under the circumstances.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Kam.

He's at fault.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Sharon,

Oh dear! Your insurer is right. Look at it like this; the insurance company of the parked car will expect to have the cost of the repairs to their policyholders car to be paid for. And who will that be? Your husbands insurance company. They have to pay. And because they HAVE to pay that makes it a fault claim on your husbands policy. You say your husband wasn't at fault because of mechanical problems with your car. But look at your policy booklet. It will say that it is the policyholders responsibility to make sure the car is roadworthy and safe to drive. So again your insurer will not take that into account. The only thing your husband can do is try and get the manufacturer (not the dealer) to investigate and confirm the mechanical cause. And I'm afriad that is going to be a bit of a battle as they are reluctant to accept any liability unless the problems you are having with your car have been the subject of a recall or if the manufuturer has made dealers aware that some models of their cars have a tendancy to have this or that problem. It might be worth getting an independent motor engineer report done that you can then wave under the manufacturers nose. That can help.

Kam 3 years ago

Thanks for your help. I have been searching the net for some answers. I have come across some sites that say if your car door was open it is obstucting traffic. This worried me, even though my door was open before the other car came round the corner. Thanks again.

mazino 3 years ago

i was driving in the left lane of the road and i was going into the next lane but i saw a driver coming so i went back into my lane (the car was about 3-4 meters behind me) only my right tire crossed the line of the lane and i quickly went back in. she for some reason swerved and hit a snow bank, are cars did not come into contact.

whose fault was it.

Deb 3 years ago

My daughter and son in law were in an accident last night. They were going thru an intersection, when the car on the right swerved towards them, causing them to swerve into the center median, bursting the tires, ripping off the oil pan, and other unknown damage. The other driver stopped, police were called. The other driver had been drinking but was not over the legal limit, had expired registration, and was changing lanes in the intersection. The police officer told my daughter that because there were no independent witnesses and that the other driver never made contact with their car, that they could only add the other driver as a witness, and that although he believes she swerved toward them, he cant say she was at fault. He also said, he was going to do them a favor and not write a report, because if he does, it looks bad and makes my son in law look at fault. Do they have ANY recourse? Luckily no injuries, but the car may be totaled.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Mazino,

Well, I was going to say it was your fault as your decision to change lanes forced her to take avoiding actions that ended up with her sitting in a snow bank. After all she didn't know that you were going to move lanes let alone that you were going to change your mind. However, she must also bear some responsibility for her fate. She was behind you and should have kept her braking distance that would allowed her time to react to any situation in front of her as it developed. Mind you I would still put most of the blame on you here because you should have looked and seen her and realised that changing lanes at that precise moment was not the best thing to do. But (and it's a big but) there was on contact between you. There is no way, I believe, that your insurer will hold you at fault for the accident since you weren't involved in the accident (meaning that your car wasn't hit and damaged). She can't prove that your driving caused her to swerve off into a snow bank. What's more your insurer will argue that she was too close behind you.

An insurance company in 99.9% of cases will never accept that their policyholder was involved in an accident if there is no damage to their policyholders car. Think about it...the flood gates will open. every driver who slams his car into a tree or wall will then point at some random driver and say "he/she made me do it. they did this they did that." It is not unusual for people to be accused of hitting some ones car weeks (sometimes even moths) after the event allegedly happened.

One means of defence against these allegations is for an engineer to examine the car and check if there is any signs of accident damage on it or any signs of such damage having been repaired. So I think you'll be fine here. She can't prove anything and there is no damage to your car.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Deb, mean cross road right? (I'm in the UK and I assume you're in the USA or similar). Anyway, the crucial point here is...there was no contact between your two cars so as far as liability is concerned his insurer will not accept any fault. Have a look at my reply to Mazino's question which explains why. Since there was no contact between your two cars your insurer will have to pick up 100% of the tab on this one and it will go down on your policy as a fault claim. You can rest assured that the other drivers insurer will not accept any liability.

mazino 3 years ago

really appreciate the reply, whether it contained bad or good news, i appreciate the fact you responded. thank you, and keep doing what you do

Sharon 3 years ago

Just wanted to say thanks for your help x

Alison 3 years ago

Just to let you know. My insurance got 100% non fault on my part.

Thanks for your help

noreen 3 years ago

driving on one way system when a truck pulled out on my right hand side hitting into my back passanger door ,his boss who witnessed accident came over and told me my car would be looked after gave me name of place to go and get it fixed when he knew that it was right off he is nowing saying that if i had remained stationary and not to have squeezed by him accident would not have happened

noreen 3 years ago

at no stage did i stop he hit me as i was passing him as he was parked on my right he said if i had remained stopped accident would not have happened bot at no stsge did i stop ,have acessors report and independent report and they say it shows that he pulled out on me

jamzt86 3 years ago

can sum1 plz help me:

i was drivn down the road last nyt and to my left there was a carpark and to my right was the traffic going up the road but a woman had been parked facing the other direction and she pulled out and came across my road turning into the carpark and i drove into the passenger side of her hitting her passenger door and front wheel. who is at fault she crossed my path to get to the carpark.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Jamzt86,

She is, as you rightly say she crossed over in front of you.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Noreen,

Assuming I have understood you correctly - you were proceeding along a 1 way street when a lorry parked at the side of road moved off as you were passing and hit you. He is at fault. How were you supposed to know what the lorry driver was or wasn't going to do? It was the drivers job to check that the road was clear for him. It's obvious what the owner is trying to do - he wants to "muddy the waters" to create enough doubt & uncertainty in the mind of your own insurer to try and convince them that you were (perhaps) the author of your own misfortune and get them to offer a 50/50 settlement. Don't. He's at fault.

noreen 3 years ago

thanks will let you know what happens

Cooks77 3 years ago


I got hit to the front left wing of my car while turning right on a mini roundabout. The third party failed to give way directly to my left and hit me. However, the insurance are suggesting 50/50 split settlement (with their sister company) as the third party claims we both pulled onto the roundabout together and therefore the highway code does not apply in this instance?

Any help would be appreciated.

Malcolm 3 years ago

Hi, I was travelling to work at 21.20pm and after going thru a little village with a 30mph limit I was just leaving the speed lilmt zone going over a hump back bridge when as I put my lights back on to full beam, I was faced with no road but a long wheeled Ford Transit van dark blue all the way across the road, reversing into a drive. I ended up colliding into the rear wing of the van and scraping a parked car that was parked right up to the entrance the van was reversing into. There were no street lights and there were no lights clearly visable from tge van as tge front of the van was tight against the hedge across the road and the rear lights were hidden behind the parked car, which later I learnt belonged to the van drivers mother, which is where he was reversing into. Am I at fault for hitting the van and car when I feel he should of waited for it to be safe before blocking off the road. Malcolm

reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Cook77,

Since it's a mini-rab at fault. I'm assuming that you were already on it while the 3rd party hit you as they tried to enter it? But is he saying you were both on the rab? (how - its a mini rab!) Where is the damage on the 3rd party vehicle? I assume its on his f/o/s wing area.

And I don't see how you can be told that the Highway code doesn't apply...tell the cops that I'm sure they'd be delighted to be told that.

No, you need to be firm here. If you were on the rab then you have priority. Does your insurer know exactly where you (& the 3rd party) entered the rab and where you (& he) intented to exit? If you were both on the rab then your insurer has a point you wont be able to prove that the 3rd party was at fault but otherwise, if that's not the case, stick to your guns.

reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Malcolm,

Hmm. On the one hand the van was reversing (a risky manoeuvre at the best of times) at night where there adequate street lighting. But on the other hand all the more reason for you to be doubly careful.

a) it was dark and b) you going over a hump back bridge so you had no idea of what was ahead of you and c) your speed d) and you put your lights on full beam at the last minute meant that you gave yourself no chance to stop/avoid anything on the road blocking your path. It could have been a cyclist, a child, a dog. anything. I think you had better be prepared for the worst.

malcolm 3 years ago

Thanks for that, I was always tought not to travel thru villages with full beam on. Being high up in the van they would easilly of seen my lights coming thru the village, should they of waited until it was clear before doing such a difficult move in the dark? A cyclist or a child would not of taken up the whole road like he did which would of enabled me yo avoid them. At the top of this page there is referance to whos road it is and no matter if the driver had his feet on the dash the question reverts to would there of been an accident if that vehicle had nit been blocking the road. Does that not apply in my case.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Malcolm,

Yeah I know what you're refering to "at the top of the page...". But the fact is the van was already in the road in the process of reversing into a driveway. And it was pitch black. Sure he might see your lights but

a) would he know that it meant a car was coming towards him. and

b) even if he had known you were coming over the hump back bridge what could he have done about it? Finally

c) he'd be busy looking behind him and concentrating at the job in hand to have any time to look around to see if anyone was coming.

I know I said that vehicles on the main road have priority over cars exiting side streets & driveways but as I've said, he was already on the road. Your best bet is to try this: when you are making a 3 point turn you are at fault if you hit a car as it passes you. You are making the manoeuvre so it's your job to make sure you execute it safely. Same here the reversing van was manoeuvring like a car in the middle of making a 3 point turn. I just don't think you'll be successful here simply because of the points I made in my 1st response. But it's worth a try. But if I was the van driver I'd simply say it was your responsibility to be more aware of the road conditions and of the potential hazards bearing in mind it was dark and you were unsighted as you went over that bridge.

Becface 3 years ago

Hello, I was out with a friend on a side road, waiting to exit on to a main road turning right, I was slowly edging out as the on going traffic was moving, waiting for the traffic lights further down the road to change and stop them allowing me to pull out! I then stopped as to not pull out to far, cause an obstruction and get my car hit by this ongoing traffic? In between these traffic lights and my side road on the opposite side is a retail park that can come round the corner towards us, I had checked both ways nothing coming from my right but a car had pulled up from the left indicating to come down my side road, whilst allowing me to pull out in front of them, however I did not move as behind them a car was coming around them to carry on straight down the road, so I stayed stationary! As we looked right to check again before moving so that I could pull out a car has come out of the retail park at speed, ripped off my bumper and then proceeded to drive on, swerve and hit 2 parked cars! I understand he is right of way, but I had not moved, cars minutes before previously passed with no damage! When he exited the car he had headphones in both ears and was clearly on the phone! I also have witnesses who were passing by saying they saw me not moving and him coming out of nowhere at speed and hit Me? Am I at fault? It's driving me insane! I know he had right of way but I did not pull out and was not moving when he hit me! I don't think he was paying attention, also he has hardly any damage to his car, (broken wing mirror, flat back tire and scratches to his body around the tire) while mine and the two park have extensive damage! Help!

Malcolm 3 years ago

ok fair comment, thanks.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Becface,

I understand you were not moving but...were you in his path. All he has to do is tell his insurance company that as he exited the retail park and the next thing he knew there was a car that (he thought) was exited a side street. He was forced to swerve causing him to hit 2 other cars. Yes, he might have not been paying attention and if he was on his mobile he will (or shd get) points on his licence. But it will still be "your fault". I know you will think that most unfair (and I don't necessarily disagree with you) but ask yourself this question. If the road had been empty of traffic would the accident have happened? Even if he had earphones on and was texting on his phone and he was speeding there was no accident. So why did an accident happen...because there was traffic, because you were there.

You were stationary but shd you have been stationary where you were on the road? A small mitigating factor might be, was he overtaking anyone before he hit you? If he was then he will have to take some (but a smaller) share of the blame since he sdn't overtake since he will be unsighted if anyone (you in this case) exits a side str.

mgreen99 profile image

mgreen99 3 years ago

hello i have a quick question,

i was driving on the right lane going into a bend, i was close to the right curb a lady was taking the bend going to other direction and this bend has a large area for that driver to use for the turn, she cam across my bumper and bent it up, her driver door was all messed up... i was on my side, no cops came we filled out a report, the insurance is saying 50/50.... how can that be? i was on my side ther is a curb and a sidewalk, the other driver has all this space to make her proper turn....

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello mgreen99,

Are in the USA? Sounds like it. To be honest I don't know what rules your insurance companies operate under. Also I'm not 100% clear about what happened here. This "large area" is this a partition in the road to allow traffic going one way to turn round and go back the way they came? From what you've written it sounds like the other driver coming towards you and cut across your path as she made in effect a u-turn. Is that what happened? in the UK that would put her at fault but I don't know what the rules are in the US (if that's where you're from).

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello mgreen99,

Are in the USA? Sounds like it. To be honest I don't know what rules your insurance companies operate under. Also I'm not 100% clear about what happened here. This "large area" is this a partition in the road to allow traffic going one way to turn round and go back the way they came? From what you've written it sounds like the other driver coming towards you and cut across your path as she made in effect a u-turn. Is that what happened? in the UK that would put her at fault but I don't know what the rules are in the US (if that's where you're from).

kumar 3 years ago

A car stationed wrongly in a bay which has occupied opposite bay and my car was reversing into that opposite bay.and got hitted but i can see no damage to wrong car and this has taken place in Superstores area on this boxing day.

Paw 3 years ago

pulled away from lights there was 4 lanes i was on the inside lane and lane 2 has arrow to merge into left lane and lane 4 has arrow to merge into lane 3, the car was not in front of me and he pulled over and went into my car, he is saying i undertook him , the damage to his car is a small dent above the front passengers side wheel arch ther is nothing wrong with the whole front wing of my drivers side but there is a dent in the middle of the drivers door and scratch marks all along the back door of the drivers side and also took off both the trims on the front and rear doors, he is saying it is my fault as i am a new driver but he banged into me the impact made my car go the the left up the kerb

Gary 3 years ago

I was driving along a main road the road conditions were very icy. A car pulled out of a side road and stopped in the middle of the road. I braked but started to slide i managed to avoid the car but ended up in a hedge and against the bumper of a stationary van damaging the drivers side wheel arch and passenger side door mirror my insurance company are saying they can not put fault on the other car driver as i did not collide with him and the to lots of damage would be recorded as separate claims resulting in 2 lots of excess is this right.

Marie 3 years ago


when I was reversing my car at the car park I bumped the other car being parked in a further perpendicular line to my parking place. I was driving at approx.2-3mph and my car didn't suffer any relevant damage (just a little tiny line scratch at the rear left bumper, barely visible). The other car was damaged with a small scratch and a pea sized paint scrape. I passed my insurance details to the person whose car I bumped. Though when trying to contact my insurance company the only option to report an incident is to make a claim on my vehicle being damaged that I do not want and need to do. Should I then make a claim or just wait until my insurer is going to contact me itself?

Thecoach2013 3 years ago

Hi, quick one for you, on my road two houses down there are major renovations going on, one of their "white vans" was reversing and scraped the left side of my car sat parked outside my house.

My wife saw the event out of our main bedroom window and poked her head out of the window to make it clear she had seen the event.

The damage is a series of paint scrapes from the edge of the left side front bumper to the edge of the wheel arch

I've been quoted £300 to get that fixed

A) is that an ok price

b) I have said I'm happy to go non insurance, but am I wrong to do this?

reinhard beck 3 years ago


to answer point "A". If you think it is OK then it is Okay. But if you want my opinion it sounds okay to me but it all depends on how many panels have been damaged and how deep the scratches are.

(But I am assuming that the van driver has accepted he was at fault and that he will pay for the damage in which case he has to agree that it's okay too) which brings me neatly to your point "B" what does "going non insurance" mean? Have you two shaken hands on it. If you have are you positive that he will pay? Have you aproached your insurance company? Because it is a non fault accident his insurance company will pay (and all the van driver has to do to keep it "non-insurance" is to pay them back what they sepnt on repairing your car).

Assuming he accepts liability I would still report it to your insurer but let them know you are looking to settle it privately. Ask them to call his insurer & get them to confirm that he has reported it too and accepts laibility. They might even offer to deal with you direct which you can do as well and they will (should anyway) provide you with a courtesy car. In my experience two things tend to happen in cases like this. The driver at fault changes his mind when he realises how much the repairs will actually cost and either says he didn't hit your car or he tries to get loads of quotes and weeks later your car is still looking wrecked. Get him to confirm to his insurance company that he is at fault for hitting your car and it is your decision who repairs your car.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Marie,

Even if you don't want to claim for any damage to your car you still need to report this incident to your insurer. I'm surprised actually they haven't rung you to get your version of events. Ring them up and tell tem what happened but that you are not claiming for any damage to your car. (your excess in that case on your policy wont apply). If the damage to the other car is minor it might be worthwhile rining your insurer to see how much the claim cost and think about paying it back so that you don't loose your NCB.

lilo 3 years ago

please if any one can help me ?? i work mechanic in a gas station and i was driving customer car i had to bring it to the bay to check the problem in it so i was going forward going true the bay and lady she rear ended me but the damge was in her passenger rear door cause she swing left and the damage for the car i was driving was in the rear bumper so who in fault ??

reinhard beck 3 years ago


She is.

Humble pie 3 years ago

Husband was driving on main road me and our son were in the car.

Came to box junction and police car was waiting there to turn right officer had just exited through their back entry and joined the box junction as we are now approaching the box junction. Officer had to wait because there was a car waiting before this box junction, that car was to our left and we were on its right because after the b junc we wanted to turn right and our lane ahead of us was clear. The arrows on the floor indicate straight on or right, but the straight on arrow is much much prominent. Police had no blue lights or sirens she was going back to other dept in city centre, as she told me later on whilst my husband sat in sergeants car giving a breatheliser test and name and details.

So she's waiting in the box junction and we have approached at same time and also entered the box junction seeing the lane ahead is clear. She s let most of our car pass almost 3/4 of it and then she hit us and our rear bumper fell off. She hit the back of our car passenger side. There was CCTV from the police gates where the exit gates are and only half the box junction can be seen, the lanes ahead of box junc cant be seen.

Police have cautioned interviewed my husband about three weeks later and blamed,him for being in the wrong lane. We took a solicitor poor has advised hubby to accept blame and either wait for court summons or driver safety course. The police and solicitor have really upset us. They showed the CCTV and insisted he watched our car, not emphasising the hit from police car. We haven't ever been inside police station let alone have been cautioned at interview. Husband was petrified and I was upset. His English language is poor so interpreter was arranged by police. He awaits response from police for his offence. I don't know what that is and how it will affect his clean license.

I have been in touch with ins at all times reported to them following day after accident. I have asked my ins to help me with solicitor who won't risk my liability as I have legal cover but they said it isn't for things like this. So asked this solicitor from friend he did reassure me to not worry but seems as though he's really not done his job. We await for his reply.

I have paid £250 for excess on my repair bill as garage thru ins were able to fix it took them just under 4 weeks and they gave me courtesy car to drive, this is the garages.

Can you please suggest where we stand our fault or polices. They now have it in writing my husband accepting being in wrong lane therefore, his fault. We are both very upset about this problem and have a special needs child who needs our care and attention. But I know this wont sort itself

evelyn mendoza 3 years ago

Last summer, I got involved into a car accidents which it was my fault. I made a stop at an intersection and i looked both sides, but i didn't noticed the car coming. HE CAME FAST at a low speed street. Anyways, we are now in 2013 and my father's insurance are going to cancel his account because of me! According to the insurance company, I got seven points on my license. FYI: luckily, the person i hit did not sued me. I have been driving for five years, and that was my only car accident. My dad had IFA insurance for almost ten years, so that because of ONE accident that was not my dad's fault, is being cancelled! Money is spent on car insurance, that in the end, they give you the middle finger. I do not understand. I bet this situation would have been different if I was the daughter of a CEO of any car insurance. I see no purpose in having a car insurance.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago


Have you got 7 points on your licence. If you haven't why do they think you have?

I assume you are a named driver on your fathers policy. For all I know the terms and conditions of your fathers policy might exclude drivers who have points on their licence.

It is always the policyholder who is responsible for the additional drivers on his policy. If they break the terms and conditions of that policy then it is the policyholder who has to take the consequences.

Are you sure it is the points on your licence that is the problem? It could be (and this often happens) that a parent will add a sibling to a policy but fail to mention to the insurer that the child will be the "main user".

Or the vehicle is used for business by the child when the parent insured it under "Social, Pleasure, dometic & Commuting." Your dad should ring his insurer to try to find out the real reason. (You are in the USA?) but if he gets no joy from them you will have a regulatory authority that will look into it for him.

reinhard beck 3 years ago


I'm not 100% sure what happened here. You start by saying that the police car was waiting there (in the box junction?) waiting to turn right but you then go on to say that it had to wait before entering the box junction because of another car that was to your left. Then you say the police car was waiting in the box and the way ahead of you was clear but then she hit your rear bumper. ..

It sounds to me as if you were driving straight on through a box junction when a police car exited the polcie yard onto the main road and into the box junction and they hit your car. If that is what happened I'm not clear why you have been advised to accept liability or why the policy want to caution your husband? what is your husban supposed to have done wrong?

evelyn mendoza 3 years ago

Dear Reinhard Beck:

Greetings! well apparently the insurance told my dad that i had seven points under my license. And I do not think we are under the "Social, Pleasure, dometic & Commuting" policy.

Humble pie 3 years ago

Thank you for your reply what you have said is correct second paragraph, we were driving straight through the junction box. The police car had left the police yard and we noticed this as she was outside the gate but by the time we approached the box junction she to had entered the box junction and waited for us to move along and slowly my husband did so. Baring in mind the car to our left which was stationary had infact caused her to stop in front of it and made her check if her way was clear, which it wasn't as we were there. So we committed to drive past and most of our car had passed hers she's then hit the rear passenger side bumper and it fell off. I think their cars are modified with steel bumpers so it took me back as to why her car was merely grazed at the front and my bumper had fallen to the floor... Our phone batteries were low so we didn't take any pictures of the damage.

They cautioned my husband because they had it all on CCTV and due this evidence police had to give cautioned interview. The solicitor has wrote to husband today saying " you accept you drove your motor vehicle on the wrong side of the road and by doing so caused a collision with the police patrol stated that there was queuing traffic ahead but on the opposite carriageway there was no traffic so took the opportunity to get around the traffic as your intention was to turn right. ...I advised you to admit to the matter on the basis that the police had CCTV footage are clearly shown to be on the wrong side and police officers who were turning right from the police station were not able to see you as there was queuing traffic to the right obscuring their vision state you regret your actions and your driving was wrong on this occasion."

There was only one officer involved and had her vision been obscured then why did she hit after we had passed her, 3/4 of the car had passed her. What I'm trying to say is because she couldn't see us then surely, she would have hit the front of my car passenger side, that would explain her vision was obscured. But she had seen us clearly she wasn't happy with our driving and surely it would have been easier to put her sirens on and flashed us to speak to my husband re his driving. She let us pass well most of the car and then hit us, her vision wasn't obscured when our car was passing the front of her car.

The solicitor has said it may go to court where he will be fined accordingly and will receive penalty points but he hopes that the police don't prosecute and that the officer dealing with this will forward a recommendation for a driving course. This decision now lies with Accident Management Unit.

I don't know what to do and we don't know where we stand. Thank you for getting back to me I really appreciate this.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello again,

First of all I'm not a solicitor ok. But the fact remains that you were on the main road and as such you have the right of way. It was the police cars responsibility to make sure that it was safe for her to turn onto the main road. The accident happened because it wasn't safe. When the police car made its turning it did so "at it's own risk". You were there to be seen and the fact that you weren't isn't your fault. (If the police car had hit a pedestrian or a cyclist what would they say then? sorry we hit you but its your fault because your are so small!) The fact that you were hit on the rear pass side only shows she MUST have seen you because she hit you as you were passing in front of her. I just think the police are trying to bully you here. Just because another road user is driving "poorly" is not a justification for running into them. If it was we'd all be doing it so that we could get our car repaired at their expense and threaten them with court if they don't. It's easy for me to say but just because it goes to court it doesn't mean you will loose. Sure you will get points on your licence for being in the wrong lane but will the judge agree with the police that this caused the accident? I'm not so sure.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Evelyn,

Yes I know that's what they say? But have you got 7 points on your licence? Did they know that when the policy was incepted (I assume you were a named driver on the policy from the start). The reason why they want to cancel your dad's policy could also be that when you were driving you were using it for reasons not covered on the policy. If your dad had business use on his policy it does not necessarily mean that yu as an additional driver have it too.

Moises 3 years ago

I stopped to park my car and it was apprx 5 meters away from the STOP sign. before i can check my mirrors to see if somone is behind me i get hit by a car on my bumper in the driver side, and the guy that hit me, hit me with the passenger side fender,,,,insures gave the case to him and i lost. who is at fault and it was down hill aprx an acute angle 20 degerees, am i at fault?

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Moises,

I need more info. Were you parking at the side of a road? Were you stationary? Where was the other driver coming from? was he reversing? Was he trying to park too?

Paul Rooney 3 years ago

I was in the left hand lane, when a 3rd party travelling in the opposite direction turned right to enter a side street, crossing both lanes of my side of the road. She said a driver in the right hand lane had flashed her across but that it was my fault as I must have been speeding. Damage is to my front driver side bumper and the passenger side of her car. Should I accept 50/50 or is she wholly at fault?

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Paul,

You are definitely not at fault. She crossed your path (and how does she know you are speeding saying "you must have" is not proof. And if she really did think you were speeding why did she make that turn?!)

Anyway your speed is a red herring here. Even if you were speeding she is still at fault because she made the manoeuvre that caused the crash.

Not only that, she admits she took her cue from another 3rd party who flashed his lights (his lights are not traffic lights are they and nor was that individual a traffic cop) so on what authority does he direct traffic?

Al 3 years ago

Hi, some good advice there. My situation is slightly different although very similar to some of the above.

I was reversing off my drive in the recent snowy conditions and reversed in to a clear road. As I was engaging first gear and carefully moving away, a car approached from behind travelling too fast for the conditions and could not stop in time and hit me squarely. I was told by my insurance company that it was my fault as I had reversed in to the road and the other driver had the right of way. However, there were no cars in view when I finished reversing, although this car may have been on the same road, he would have been too far behind for me to see.

There were no witnesses other than his passengers who are now claiming for injuries suffered in the accident. That as well as the drivers abusive manner after the accident don't sit right with me, as all were perfectly fine immediately after what wasn't a significant crash.

Your opinion on this would be much appreciated.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Al,

You are right your situation is slightly different but the difference is crucial. You were already moving forward when you were hit in the rear. Now, the question is when you exited out of your driveway, halted, selected 1st gear & started to move off had you "unreasonably" reduced the other drivers chances to break in time and avoid hitting you? The conditions play a part here but the problem is; how does anyone prove what part the conditions played? So, yes normally you would be the innocent part if you are hit in the rear, but your scenario can be an exception if it appears that your manoeuvre gave the other driver behind you no time and space to take avoiding action. I don't know if you will get another "bite at the apple" but stress to your insurer that yes you appreciate that you were reversing. BUT that manoeuvre had been completed and you were moving forward and fully establsihed on the road. There is no excuse for being hit in the rear under these cicumstances - ok in 1st gear you weren't going very fast but as a driver you know as well as anyone that you will have to slow down from time to time and if you are hit in the rear the driver behind is at fault and it's no different here.

paul rooney 3 years ago

Hi thanks for the advice. I made a slight mistake in my account, the damage was to my car was my bumper but on the front passenger side.

My insurance company has suggested they may have to take split liability depending on where the damage is to the 3rd party's car. They said the further back the damage was the more it could be argued that the 3rd party's car was there to be seen - they said the Highway Code says something about taking steps to avoid an accident even if the other driver makes an illegal manoeuvre.

I was taken aback as I'd always assumed this kind of collision would be non-fault. And they're supposed to be on my side! What is your opinion? It would be much appreciated.

Al 3 years ago

Thanks Reinhard,

I'll get in touch with them and see if they'll let me have a second bite!

Thanks again


emmielou 3 years ago

please help,a van driver was driving like an idiot up our rear,sppeding up to then pulling away,i had to brake and he hit me,i have a witness to this.his insurers assessed our vehicle and classed it as cat d then offered us 2 choices take our car back and money for us to fix or take the full price for car and they will scrap.i instructed that we wanted our car back,after not receiving the money we were told that third party said we pulled out on him and slam our brakes on,(untrue) a second assesment came and now they wont pay out and are denying liability,but still want to interview our witness,also they are refusing to pay for our car hire,what do i do? and how can i prove he was driving like an erratic fool

i didn't use my insurance company but a company my family have used for years,they are a claims management company,but ive received a letter from the solicitors saying they can no longer act for me as he is denying liability ??? it just all seems such a mess,and i dont feel i should be liable for costs,as he hit me up the rear,please help. thankyou in advance

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Emmielou,

First thing. You were hit in the rear. That means you're not at fault.

If you pulled out on him and then slammed on your brakes it means he failed to keep a safe braking distance from you and hence he is still at fault. (the only poss exception wd be if you come out of a side str so quickly and suddenly onto a main rd that the other driver hits you in the rear because your action cut down his braking distance making it impossible for him to avoid hitting you) Doesn't sound to me like this is what happened here. You shd contact your insurer they are the ones who make decisions on liability not your accident management co (or solicitors). Don't worry about the witness being interviewed - thats why you have a witness; they will back up your version of events. It's no surprise either that the third party is denying liability so naturally they withdraw the offer to settle. So;

1) contact your insurer.

2) get them to call the 3rd party insurer and find out exactly what the van driver is saying.

3) make sure your insurer speaks to your witness.

4) get out of the hire car. Leave it to your insurer to arrange it as they are the ones paying for it (& claim back from 3rd party insurer).

5) you're lucky its on a cat 'D'. That means its superficial bodywork damage on a car so old that its not worth repairing because its not worth very much. But still perfectly safe to drive.

5) the van driver has to come up with a plausible explaination of how it is your fault eventho the damage is to your rear (I assume its bang on in the middle and not on some rear corner).

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Paul,

I can see why you would be miffed at having to accept a possible 50-50 which think would be harsh. Yes, the other driver was "there to be seen" but so where you and since they were the ones making the turn across your path it was their responsibility to make sure they did it safely. If they argue a 50-50 ask them "but if I slammed on my brakes to avoid her then I would be putting myself at risk and be in danger of getting rear ended and getting injured). The Highway code reminds drivers to take care and be aware of what is going around them and yes it's true that just because another driver does something "silly" that is not necessarily a justification for hitting them - but the Highway Code does not expect you to be a mind reader or take avoiding action that puts you or others at risk.

Kandiibabii 3 years ago

Hi i was on a roundabout in the left lane there was one exit before my exit then my exit, the guy infront looked kind of lost so i kept my distance he suddlenly to the exist i slowed down and the guy behind me hit right into the back of me. We came out the car me and my 3 passengers him and his 2 passenger he admited liabilty exchange insurance details then left. He then kept calling me asking to do it privatley i said no (im third party) when i spoke to my insrance i was put though to an accident company they said they cant take on the case because the third party is tisputing liabilty and saying i cut into his lane on the roudabout which is why he hit into the back of me. Ive now had to folk out for a solicitor myself and currently have no car how am i going to prove that what hes saying isn't true and he went striaght into the back of me? Do u think i will win this case?

paul 3 years ago

Thanks for the advice Reinhard. I'm sure everyone here appreciates the time you take to answer our worries! I may not be able to use your argument as I did brake sharply but there wasn't enough distance to be able to stop. Thanks though.

Rosemary 3 years ago

19 year old niece reversed into stationary vehicle in employers car doing substantial damage to the stationary vehicle. Employer is hreatening to sue niece if she does not reimburse him for damage caused.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Paul,

The fact that you slam on your brakes only confirms that the 3rd party is at fault.

Another point - is the fact that she took her cue from the driver who flashed his lights on record? When I was a claims advisor and one of my policyholder did that my 1st reponse was "whooh! you shouldn't be paying attenti what's ahead of you."

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Rosemary,

He's being a bit obnoxious isn't he? All he has to do claim for damage on your nieces insurance policy. She is at fault so even if all she has is TPO her insurance will pay for his damage.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Kandiibabii

You better change your insurance's their job to deal with claims and the minute there is a problem an accident management company will dump you. Also they are expensive which is why a decent insurer wont touch them. So ...

a) go back to your insurer and say that the 3rd party is now disputing liability. It's their job to find out why and defend your interests.

b) You were hit in the rear (the damage to the rear of your car proves that) so you can't be at fault. He says you cut in front of him but if he can't prove it then it doesn't mean a thing.

c) accidents on r-a-b's are notoriously difficult to resolve when an accident happens in which both parties were on the r-a-b but that is usually because some one hits someone on the side as they try to make their move for an exit. But that is not the case here. He's at fault. If he wants to blame you he will need to come up with some hard facts.

Paul 3 years ago

Hi Reinhard

I left my car at a garage so that could get an MOT. When I came back there was scratch marks on the rear wheel arch and rear door.

I complained to the garage (a large company) who at first tried to claim it was there when I left it and then agreed to look into it.

After 2 weeks of them looking into it I phoned my insurance company who don't want to know saying that it will count against me if I claim and I will have to pay excess as they cannot claim against the garage.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Paul,

Well of-course they can claim against the garage for Pete's Sake! All garages will have insurance to cover contingancies like this (& this wont be the first time it's happened). And you're not having much luck with your garage either (don't they want your business or something?) getting rid of those scratches will at 5 mins at most!

So, you can claim on your insurance of-course but if the garage insist that they didn't cause the damage then it will count against you. If you are "lucky" the cost of cleaning up those scratches might be less than your excess which means that there will be no claim on your policy since your insurer isn't paying for it. At the very least your insurer should pick up the phone and ask to speak to the bodyshop manager.

Paul 3 years ago

Thanks Reinhard,

I thought as much, I don't think some of these people in the call centres have a clue.

in a right mess 3 years ago

Hi my partner was recently in accident. He was at a zebra crossing stationary letting a family cross the road, when a woman crashed into the back of him, luckily the farther of the family on the crossing saw what was going to happen and managed to get his family to step back from the crossing. Thewoman admitted liability at the time and we had letters from her insurance stating this and they had inspected our car and written it off and were just valuing it. Now this was 3 weeks ago the insurance are now saying they need to investigate the accident further which can take 90 days we lose our hire car tomorrow and our car is written off from their insured driver!is there anything we can do? we were only 3rd party so cant claim hire car on ours. There are independant witness statements main ones beingfrom the family on the crossing, thanks in advance

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi there "in a right mess".

This is a "slam dunk" as they say in the US. It doesn't matter what cover you have if the other driver is at fault. Again the other drivers' insurer is liable for all costs - including hire car. Therefore if they deem it necessary to faf around for 3 months they should pay for your hire car for that time. But first I would find out

a) what are they investigating (I can only imagine they think that you staged the accident)? something must have spooked them to decide they need to investigate 3 weeks after the accident happened otherwise the 3 month investigation period should have happened from week one (and not on week 3) and

b) get them to confirm that they will continue to pay for hire while they investigate.

in a right mess 3 years ago

Hi reinhardbeck, thanks for your reply. The insurance company were actually making offers a week after the accident after they had assessed the damage on both vehicles, we then spoke with them regarding the value and told them we would not accept the valuation they gave us so they asked us to provide evidence as why we thought the car was worth more than they did within 30 mins I had emailed them 5 adverts for double what they offered then we heard nothing from them for 3 days then to be told this investigation now had to happen. They initially told me over the phone they didnt believe the damage to the vehicles matched so they needed to reinspect and now they are saying the whole accident is to be investigated which is not a problem with us there were independant witnesses on a crossing but they have confirmed hire car ends tomorrow and they will not renew it. It just seems so unfair our car has been written off by their driver, my parneter was out of work for a week with a loss of about £1200 and now we will have to either buy another cheap car or pay for hire its like we are in the wrong

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

hi again "in a right mess"

Have they made you an offer then? And if they have will they be sending you a cheque? Because once an insurance company has made an offer on a confirmed write off and has sent off a cheque it no longer needs to keep you in hire. I'd double check with your own they know what is going on. You never know, they might authorise a hire car and recover it from the 3rd party. Don't use an accident management company though. They are very expensive and insurance companies don't like dealing with them and also if anything goes wrong you'll be stuck with a huge bill. You can legitimately claim back all reasonable expenses from the guilty party and that includes hire charges. Ask your insurer if they will arrange hire for you with the hire company they use and chareg you trade rates £12 per day for a 1.0 litre run-a-round. But always check with your insurer (or the 3rd party insurer) before you do anything. Finally, it might not take three months - legally they have to conclude their investigations in that time. But any decent motor engineer wont have any difficulty in determining whether or not the damage to your car is consistant with the accident circumstances.

Johndavey20 3 years ago

Hi my partner was driving towards a residential t-junction which allowed a left & right turn only. When all clear he slowly turned right as a vehicle reversed out of a driveway situated straight ahead of him (or above the T of the junction) he immediately braked & beeped but the reversing car hit his front driver side bumper & smashed the light & bumper. Who is liable as they are arguing my husband shouldn't have passed the giveway line as they reckon their car was already established on the road & no longer on their drive but yet still reversing! I realise their drive is in such an awkward place but surely they saw my husband approaching the junction. Please advise

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author


That's what it will come down to...who was established on the road. The person reversing out of their drive is actually at fault. They would only be able to say you were at fault if they can show that they had completed reversing onto the road and were actually driving forward when they were hit in the rear by you. (I assume there is damage to the side of their car indicating that they were still reversing out of their drive when your husband hit them). If you are reversing out of your drive onto a road it is your responsibility to make sure that you do it safely. it is your job to look out for the cars on the road. it's not their job to 2nd guess what you are or might be doing. same rule applies to cars parked at rd side wishing to join traffic.

Johndavey20 3 years ago

Hi thanks for your response. Just an update the other party have only a small scratch to their rear bumper but our vehicle has approx £700 damage. They agreed to pay for repair to our car without going through the insurers but now have said we must pay for our own repairs or insurers will decide who is at fault & mentioned a neighbour of theirs has witnessed the incident claiming that if he had remained at the give way line no impact would have happened...obviously! However when he proceeded to cross the junction the vehicle commenced reversing. Do you feel this would affect decision of fault as my husband had stopped & sounded his horn prior to impact. Regards

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello again Johndavey20,

It sounds to me as if the guy reversing out of his drive thinks he has a witness who will back up his version of events (that your husband was at fault for not stopping at the 'give way' sign) and I also think the cost of the damage to your car has made him decide to change his mind and leave it to the insurers to decide. The 'give way' sign is a red herring here. It only applies to traffic on the road and not to people reversing out of their driveways. The other driver is hoping that the appearance of a witness will "spook" your husband into not going any further with this.

But what have you to loose. Register the claim with your insurer. If they decide that you are at fault (I'd be amazed if that was the case) you don't need to go ahead with the claim and if the 3rd party wants his scratch paid for then you can offer (if you want to) reimburse your insurer any outlay so that your premium wont be affected when your renewal is due.

People always assume that having a witness strengthens their position. Except that the witness might present evidence that infact weakens it so don't let it phase you. and like I said you can register a claim and pull out whenever you want. You policy wont be affect just as long as your insurer doesn't have to pay out any cash. If it does, you can always pay them back. So if they pay £200 for the scratch because they decide you are at fault, if you pay it back it might stop your premium going up by £300 for example. See what I mean?

Sean 3 years ago

Hi My girlfriend recently had an accident whilst going straight on at a mini island, a driver decided to pull out from the left and has damaged her front passenger side, his front drivers side is also damaged and my girlfriend has a picture of the two cars in "state of impact" however after admitting fault at the incident he is now not admitting to his insurers, we are concerned he will say he was on the island aldready (in which case will the damage locations make a difference) or that my girlfriend was indicating to turn left (the route was the short distance from her moms to our house so there is no reason for her to turn left if it was to go to court for example) a third concern is his friend showed up shortly after the incident and we suspect he may claim to be a witness, my insurers arent being overly helpful and we are concerened of a 50/50 offer but i refuse to pay increased premiums for what i feel was not her fault

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Sean,

Well first of all since your g/f was already on the r-a-b she had right of way and any other driver wanting to enter the r-a-b has to give way to traffic coming from the right. And the areas of damge on the cars would back up your version of events.

His (and your g/f's) insurance should see it this way. However...

You are right to be concerned about what he might say (happens all too often I'm afraid). Mind you as we are talking about a mini r-a-b it will be difficult for him to argue convincingly that he was on the r-a-b at the same time as your g/f and that she (somehow) turned into him. The fact that your g/f was indicating is irrelevant. He should have waited to see if your g/f really was going to turn left. The witness could be a problem...unless your insurer finds out that he is a friend of the TP. But some decent questioning of what the "witness saw" should deal with that.

johnny2wise 3 years ago

hi i was driving down a dual carriageway and as I was approaching the end there was a roundabout, there are four lanes at the giveaway point and as I was turning right I was in the farthest lane, on the right, I was about 100 yds from the giveaway point when another car on my left drove into my path, it was that close I hit its rear corner giving me no time to stop, I could see he was on the phone, and when I got out the vehicle and approached he was still talking to someone explaining he just had an accident, am I at fault.

reinhard beck 3 years ago


Well, you're going to have a problem proving you wern't. Because there is nothing to stop him from saying that you drifted into his lane which is what I'm assuming is what he is saying and he'll point to the damage to his car to try and prove it. To be honest I think the best outcome will be a 50-50 split if you stick to your version of events. I think in all probability the insurance companies involved will settle on this basis as your voe will be as plausible as his in their eyes.

WL 3 years ago

Hi ReinhardBeck,

Can i check with u?

My car was stationary parked at the side border of an carpark (beside a slot ) and someone reversed and banged on to my right hand side headlight.

Would the insurance company counter claim against my insurance company for not being in a lot?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi WL,

Short answer is; no.

Long answer is; it's possible. The reason being that any accident in a parking lot is open to dispute even when there is nothing to dispute. The other driver reversed into you but there is nothing to stop them from saying that they were stationary and you drove into them. If it can be shown that they were reversing out of a parking spot or trying to get into one then your chances will better. Your best chance will be only if the other driver is honest. Your best bet making sure they are honest is to ask them how the damage to (I assume) the rear of their car happened. But I have to prepare you for the worst if they challenge your version of events and if you don't have any indep witnesses to back you up be prepared for a 50-50 settlement.

Annmarie Williams profile image

Annmarie Williams 3 years ago

i was travelling behind a car on a 30mph duel carriageway and the car in front and myself were in the right hand lane due to cars parked on the left. the car in front indicated left then pulled slightly over into the left but was straddling the right lane. the car then moved over to the left to turn down a side street as it moved over to the left it freed up the right lane to which i was going to turn right 100 metres ahead as i moved forward the car that was in front hit me on the back offside arch and back passenger door pushing me into the central reservation.she claimed she was turning right and that it was my fault for over taking but i know she was indicating left and was in the left lane. i drove straight ahead there was no need to overtake. shes claiming she can turn right on a duel carriageway from the left lane even though i was already in the right lane getting ready to turn right myself further up. and she knew i was behind her for about 5 minuets.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Annmarie,

To summerise: The car in front of you was moving left because she was going to turn left while you (in the r/h/lane) were going straight on and turn right further up the road - at while point she hits your r/o/s. ( that's right isn't it?) If it is then as far as your respective insurance companies are concerned its going to be "six of one and half a dozen of the other".

They might conclude since it cannot be established beyond all doubt what happened both of you will have to accept a measure of liability. However, you were hit on the r/o/s. So you were far enough ahead of her for the other driver to be aware of your presence. She might be allowed to turn right...but should she have done? If she tells that to her claims advisor his/her alarm bells will start ringing because it suggests she turned into you - putting her at fault. The place where she hit it a scratches or a clear dent? And where is the damage to her car. It could all corroberate your story. (But be aware these accidents on d/c/ways so often end as 50-50 because it is so easy for each driver to say the "other driver drifted into my lane").

Pete Woodcock profile image

Pete Woodcock 3 years ago from Wigan

Hi ReinhardBeck,

Thank you in advance...

I am still awaiting court dates for an accident i had which the 3rd party pulled out of a side road resulting in me not able to stop and colliding into the side of his vehicle. The problem is they are disputing this by saying a vehicle in front of me stopped to let him out and i overtook that vehicle causing the collision which is blatent fabrication.

Do they have a case at all, there was mention of a witness initially but i havent seen anything written down and a policeman was at the scene and no witness made themselves known..

Kind Regards

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author


Yes. I'm assuming you're in the UK because if you are a "drivable TL" is a cat; C or D. That just means your insurer doesn't think its worth getting repaired because the cost would exceed the value of your car. But they will allow you keep it (if you want to) & they will still give you £500 on condition that it is used to repair the car & you get a mot certificate to prove it's roadworthiness. Then they will assure it again (but only TPO).

Alternatively, your own insurer should confirm that any reasonable costs (such as a hire car) will be met by the TPi but only if they admit liability so you need to chase your insurer on that.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Pete,

They might do. There is a case law that I can't remember the name of that applies (or might apply) here. in which case this could be a split liability claim in which 80% of the blame will rest with the other driver.

You (I think) will only be held to blame for 20%

in your favour you do have priority on the main road and it is up to a driver leaving a side street to make sure it is safe for them to do so. Even if the driver ahead of you did let him out, you can't be expected to be a mind reader. By the sound of it everyting will depend if at the hearing it is decided whether you overtook the car ahead after he stopped or if you were overtaking him before that. It sounds to me like the former. But as you say there are no witnesses. But the reason why you might be held partially at fault is if by overtaking it meant you could not see what was going on ahead of you.

Pete Woodcock profile image

Pete Woodcock 3 years ago from Wigan

Thanks for that, i do have a couple of things going for me to disprove his story like his version to the policeman at the scene was different to what it is now. The damage to the vehicles doesnt really match his version due to his vehicle hit on rear side not head on as it would likely have been if i was on the other side of the road otherwise his van would have been in the opposite homes garden. Also how is a court to decide whose story is right, if he gives 80/20 in my favour he is obviously taking his story more over mine which doesnt seem right ??

Thanks again and i will keep you informed of the outcome if you like ?

Kind Regards

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi again pete,

Why is this going to court anyway? Because the reason why insurance companies decide that a claim will be a split liability is either because

1) they can't decide who was at fault because the versions of the drivers involved contradict each other (which sounds like the case here) and

2) because both drivers were the authors of their own misfortune (which could also apply here). I know what you're saying and I don't disagree in general but there is more here than meets the eye? I'm guessing that the other side will say you are at fault for the accident because you were overtaking the car ahead when you shouldn't have done. But why shouldn't you? The driver ahead of you might have stopped and "flashed" the other driver to say it was okay for him to exit the side street. But how does he know it's safe? Nor should the driver exiting a side street assume that if a driver on the main road stops to let him out

it is safe for him to do so. The test case that I was refering to is the case where a car exiting a side street onto a main road of stationary traffic was hit by a motor bike as it overtook the line of stationary on the outside lane with his vision obsured by a lorry. the motor bike was found 20% guilty because his actions were foolish given the circumsatnces. Yes, he was within his rights to overtake the stationary traffic but he should have waived his rights on this occasion. It may be that the court might be thinking along those lines. Let me know how it all turns out. Good luck.

Hola 3 years ago

There are two cars in front of me (so I am car number 3). Car 1 waiting to make a left turn, car 2 (in front of me) is waiting for the car in front, and I am also waiting. As I was waiting I heard a screeching sound, which was a car trying to stop and swerves into the other lane and crashes into the curb/island. I proceeded my way home, but was I supposed to stay and make a report? Should I still make a report?

Elliot Oxley 3 years ago

Hi !

My wife was on her way home from work (roughly 08:20) when a big recycling wagon was coming towards her on a fairly narrow A-road and made a sharp turn up a side-street on their LH side. The back end came out on to her side of the road and went down the full wing of our car.

The driver of the wagon was quite snotty and jumped out and asked why she didn't move over. There's no room to move over (there's a lampost in the road and the wall bulges out there) and should she have to?

If he'd waited five seconds he could've swung out to make the turn - which is what you have to do in a car (never mind a wagon) to ensure you don't mount the curb.

I've just spoken to their insurance company and they're not admitting liability. How could it possibly be our fault? Sure she has right of way and he must have known his back end was going to cross the white line?

Any advice would be appreciated as I have a car that I can't drive (no wing mirror) and a couple of thousand pounds worth of damage!

Thanks in advance.


reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Hola,

I would.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Elliot,

And what does your insurance company say? I suspect they would say the same. His insurance company view will be that your wife could see that the lorry was making a left and should stopped and waited. But as you say he could have waited too and let her past because he must have known his rear end would swing over to the other side of the road. The fact is that if a car has an accident with a big vehicle or bus whose rear end swings out and hits it the car driver is blamed because they (the car) should have anticipated what could or would happen. I think that's how the TP insurer are looking at it. And I suspect that's how your insurer will look at it too. All you can try and argue is a) my wife had no time to take evasive action and b) the lorry would have waited to let your wife pass by. If I was your claims advisor the best I could try and do would be a 50-50 and argue it was a narrow road which conspired to create the circx of this accident. But that wont work if the lorry driver made his LH turn when your wife was up the road ahead of him. As for the damage to your car if you have comp cover your insurer will cover that.

Melissa 3 years ago

Hi, i'm hoping you can help put my mind at rest, i had an accident in January, my first year of driving so an important 1 year no claim for me re premiums. I was driving along a main road (taking my 69 year old nan home from tesco) i was passing a side street to my left when a car coming from the opposite direction made a right turn attempting to drive into the side street i was passing without slowing or stopping and hit the front side of my car (my car was a write off with damage to the front right wheel and bumpers and the airbag in the right side of my drivers seat deployed - i have pictures of the damage,) the damage to his courtesy car(he had this car due to an accident he was involved in the week before) was the front bumper and headlights, but since the driver admitted it was his fault and apologised and cried as soon as we got out of the cars and i was in shock i didn't think to take pictures of his car. The police attended and he told the police he thought i was slowing down to let him go but his car skidded and carried on into me (we have the police report to confirm he said this), he wrote down his details for me and didn't even ask for mine. So my insurance try to contact his insurance - turns out he gave me the wrong insurance details which they have put down to him being in a courtesy car and not knowing he was insured by a different company. Anyway we finally found the correct insurers and they ignore contact from my insurance apart from one phone call in which they said they are aware and are investigating and refuse to discuss liability over the phone but then don't get in touch again. I then get a letter from the police saying the driver has been offered a drivers improvement course or points for driving without due care ( i sent this to my insurers) then 77 days after the accident and after the police try to charge him i recieve another letter saying he now has a witness saying i was speeding and entered his lane and hit him (i can't hit the front of his car with the side of mine, it's only a standard renault clio it can't drive sidewards! And i definitely wasn't speeding with my 69 year old nan! Also i do not have a death wish and have no reason to turn a car with me and my nan into a lane of oncoming traffic!) I told my insurance from recieving this that i suspected the witness to be his boss as the TP was turning right into the street where his place of work is and we were invited in to wait for police and ambulance (as i'd hit my head off my drivers side window in the accident) inside his boss told us he thought the TP was in shock and didn't know what he was saying when he admitted liability (i told my insurance at the very beginning his boss had said this as it made me uncomfortable but why if he was in shock didn't he say i don't know what happened and not i thought she was slowing to let me go and my car skidded) anyway since his insurers were ignoring us we issued court proceedings, this was before we had recieved the police report containing his initial admission of liability. The police report also contains the witness statement they recieved 2 months after the accident from a man working in a local phone shop (the only local phone shop is the one he works at, the one we were invited in to and so it is his boss surprise surprise) he definitley didn't witness the accident as he was inside and the TP had to go in to get him, if he'd had seen he would have come out straight away surely? So the police conclude they can't charge as it is me and my witness against him and his witness. When we issued court proceedings the TP insurer decided they would reply for once and that he is now actually counterclaming against me!! We did not hear anything of him claiming against me until we'd issued court proceedings. Today i recieved the defence, in which the TP is now claiming he was stationary and had checked for oncoming vehicles and the entrance of the street he was turning into with his indicator on to turn right, as he moved off i approached at speed (which i didn't i was already across the entrance of the side street when he approached and turned without looking or slowing) it says i failed to brake in time, failed to keep any proper look out, failed to heed the precense of and give precedence to the TP's vehicle which was (apparently) being properly and lawfully driven, drove into collision with him (surely then this would have meant damage to the front of my car not the front right wheel - he drove into me!) it also says i could have avoided collinding with him had i exercised any reasonable degree of driving skill and exposed myself to a foreseaeable risk and therefore failed to have regard for my own safety. I'm furious! How can i avoid someone turning into the side of me?! What i want to know is why the hell and how the hell this can still be going to court?! With what you have said with if they are making a manouvre such as a right turn it is my right of way and he is at fault no matter if i was speeding eating drunk with my feet up on the dash (neither me or my nan were doing any of these things) why can't you be my solicitor?! Do you think i should change solicitors or stick with it? i don't see how it can get this far as to go to court! He has clearly changed his story and found a fake witness to avoid being punished for it! I may go and commit a crime, admit it to the police at the scene, then when they try to charge me magic a witness and change my mind! Sorry for the long long account but i really want to know how this hasn't already been sorted. Does he have any chance in court? Thanks, Melissa.

Laladu 3 years ago


What about this - happened to me this weekend. I was parallel parked on the road and started reversing slowly straight back so I can get some distance from the car parked in front of me to the be able to drive off forwards. The road (quite a wide one) was clear no cars coming my way and was watching all the way in the direction that I was travelling. Next thing BAM a car side-swipes me as the driver was doing a U-turn into me. Clearly never saw that car coming as it turned into me. The driver keeps insisting I am at fault as I was reversing but I feel this is not quite right seeing as I was looking into my direction of travel which was clear and staying within the area where cars are parked. Was the driver looking in their direction of travel?!?! Have advised the insurance company but it has been playing on my mind as the other driver is so insistent that I am at fault.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Laladu,

On the information I have it looks as if you will be at fault for the reasons the other driver were reversing. However, if you were parallel to the kerb on the roadside (rather tha on the rd itself) and if he was behind you then he will have to share part of the blame as he was making a maneouvre frought with risk. Was he allowed to make a U-turn at that place on that road? we you reversing before he started making his U-turn? all these factors will be taken into account and you might not be able to answer them. But the fact is, you were reversing and failed to see the other driver who, of-course failed to see you. Expect a split decision.

Johnny 3 years ago

Hi Reinhard Beck,

I was stopped in traffic behind a SUV. All of a sudden a taxi hits me from behind and pushes my car to hit the SUV in front of me. The front bumper and hood of my car need to be replaced while the rear has several scratches. The taxi driver apologized and begged me to let him go and offered to pay for the damages but I said no and I called the police. While I was talking with the taxi driver the SUV left without my knowledge so I was not able to get any of his information. Before the police arrived, the taxi driver made a call to someone and spoke in a different language. Minutes later another taxi driver arrives and parks behind us. I assume this second taxi driver is a friend to the driver who hit me and with whom he was on the phone with. Then the police arrive and take my statement and then proceed to take the statement of the driver who hit me. I overhear the taxi driver who hit me state that I crashed into the vehicle in front of me and as a result he could not break in time and thus crashed into me. Then the second taxi driver who just arrived lies to the officers and states that he saw the entire accident and supports the others claim. How can I fight this? Will his insurance refuse to reimburse me for my damages?

Johnny 3 years ago

This is Johnny again from the post above. I forgot to mention that my friend was in the car with me when the accident happened and she backs up my story.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Johnny,

They can't help you. Any witness has to be indep.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Johnny,

As for the accident itself this is a classic. Taxi drivers are always doing this. However, the fact remains he hit up in the rear. Even if it was true what he says (that you crashed into the car in front) it doesn't excuse him hitting you. It is his responsibility to keep a safe braking distance away from the car in front. The severity of the damage ought to confirm your version of events. Significant rear impact on your car shows you were hit. Lighter damage to the front of your car would suggest you were shunted into the rear of the SUV. (had you run into the back of it the damage to the front of your car would be worse). You need to get your insurer to check if the taxi drivers witness was (like yours) a friend. A witness only counts if they don't know any of the people involved in a crash. Even so, I would still expect the taxi driver to be held liable for the damage to the rear of your car at the very least.

molly2345 3 years ago

Hi, I was driving down a 2 way street with quite a sharp bend. I stopped and indicated right so i could drive straight ahead, there was a car coming towards me which was a safe distance away for me to drive straight ahead so i went. As i got into the next street, i was across the give way line leading into the next street, the car that was on the main road came behind me and drove into the back of my car. I am not aware if the driver was trying to turn left or going around the bend but from the pictures i have taken of the accident, her car is facing towards turning left into the back of my car. She was on the main road so i understand she has right of way but she has drove into the back of my car. it seems to me like she was going to turn left and has gone too fast to brake. who is at fault?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Molly 2345,

I can't quite get a picture in my head of what happened. For instance:.."I stopped and indicated right so I cd drive straight ahead" and then you go on to say "I crossed the give way line...". Do understand you right that as you crossed the 'give way' sign and turned onto the main road you were hit by the other driver? Let me say this; as you say she was on the main road and has the right of way. Was she going too fast to stop? who can say so the answer is always...she has right of way so it makes no difference. However, if you were clearly established on the main road (eg; you had completed the turn out of the other street and were travelling straight ahead at normal speed) then she would be at fault. Unless it can be shown that as you entered "her rd" you cut down her braking distance so much that she had no chance of avoiding contact no matter what speed she was going in which case you would then be at fault.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Johnny,

To be honest with you the extent of the damage to the front of your car would suggest that you went into the back of the SUV (I feel confident that the taxi driver's insurance will say the same). In shunts like this an insurer tries to establish a sequence of events and they (and I say) that if the damage to the front is significantly worse at the front than the rear then you rear ended the car in front and the taxi driver bumped into you. If however the damage to the rear is heavy then it shows the taxi hit you and that shunted you into the rear of the SUV.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Lulu,

The other driver needs to respond to what you are doing and not what they think or believe you might do or ought to do. You have the right of way. They can't prove you were in a turning lane (even if you are does mean you are turning?). Whether the lights were green or red wont be taken into consideration however as it cannot be proved what colour they were. But if the other driver was turning across your path (across on coming traffic) they need to be sure it is safe for them to do so. The fact you had an accident shows it wasn't.

molly2345 3 years ago

the main road had a sharp bend, i wanted to drive straight across so this was i wasnt following the bend round. as i drove straight across into the next road this lady decided to turn left into the road i had just pulled into, going to fast and went straight into the back of my car. its hard to explain!!

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello molly2345,

You're right, it does sound hard and I'm struggling to visualise the scene so I apologise if I'm being a bit thick but I think what you are saying is that you crossed the (main) road and were virtually across into the next rd and had crossed the 'give way' sign when a car on main rd hit you as they turned into the same road...assuming that's what happened it will depend on whether she was actually turning into that same road. If she was (if that's what she tells her insurer she was doing) then I would say she was at fault - how can she turn into a road if you are already occupying the space. You are there to be seen and she should have seen you. If she says she was not turning then she will be able to say you are at fault because she had no chance of avoiding you. Hope this helps!

jamow10 3 years ago

hi there the other week I was at a roundabout and there was a car in front of me which proceeded to move forward, I looked right to see the way was clear then proceeded to move off the roundabout myself to which the car in front suddenly broke for no reason to a stop causing myself to brake to avoid hitting her, she then put her hazard lights on so I did the same and I got out to see what she wanted, she then said " that was a bit of a jolt" to which I replied that I had not collided into her and on both inspecting our cars found no damage,because no collision had not taken place, she then got in her car and drove off,we never exchanged details and I forgot all about the matter until I was contacted by my insurer saying that a woman had told her insurer I had gone into the back of her,blatant lie, she had given the insurer my registration plate details!! she also told her insurer that there was no passengers in the car to when in actual fact my wife was in mine and she had a child in hers, i have taken my car to a reputable garage to do a check on my car to determine if it has any evidence or damage to suggest the claim that I did bang into her and the workshop controller who assessed my car is adamant that my car has not been involved in an accident, I have sent photos he took and a report to my this is evidence that my car has not been in an accident surely I cannot be liable as this is a total lie that i went into the back of her???

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Jamow 10,

I don't think you can either. When I worked as a motor claims and one of my policyholders found themselves in such a situation I would always recommend that they get evidence from a garage to have it inspected to confirm that they were not involved in an accident. It might be a good idea though to ask your insurer to get an engineer to inspect your car. If they are thorough they might ask to for details of the alleged damage of the car you supposedly hit just to see if a) there is/was any damage b) that it was caused on day when you supposedly hit her in the rear c) and if there is damage whether its consistant with alleged accident circx.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Izzybzzy

First of all my apolgies for not replying earlier but I'm supposed to get an email alert when someone posts a comment (you're not the only one I've missed as a result by the way).

However, to your problem. It is my opinion you are not at fault for this.

a) you were on the main road and while you didn't see him (anyone exiting a side street shd certainly see the traffic on the main road). If he didn't see you why didn't he? You were there "to be seen". If he did see you why did he exit the side street then he did? (You would only be at fault if you'd actually made your turn into the side street and had hit him while he was stationary and still behind the "give way" markings).

You could only be held liable to any degree if you were making your turn into the side street as he was exiting it. But it doesn't sound to me like this is what happened here. I know you were moving but I assume you were still on your side of the road. I think the hire company is under the impression that you turned into the side street eventho the other driver was exiting it. Hope this helps and sorry about the delay. I hope my advice doesn't come too late.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Melissa,

Sorry about the delay in replying but I'm supposed to get an email alert when a comment is posted.

Anyway, first thing first. Why is this going to court your insurer should be dealing with this. Do you have comprehensive cover and legal expenses cover? Your insurer should be dealing with this not you.

His witness has to be independant to mean anything (in England its slightly different in Scotland) and his boss is not independant.

In my opinion anyone who changes his mind as often as he does has to be telling porkies.

The fact is you were on the main road and "there to be seen" which means that if he was making a turn on the main road he should have made sure it was safe for him to do so. The accident proves it wasn't.

If he is blaming you for being a lousy driver why did the police recommend he goes on a driver improvement course?

The 3rd party insurer doesn't want to discuss liability over the phone...if you'd been at fault they would have been more than happy to!

I hope this helps and apologies again for not responding earlier.

Jamow 10 3 years ago

thank you for your reply, I have spoken to my insurer and they have confirmed that they will take the course of action that you have suggested, its annoying that people out there are making fraudulent claims and they should be prosecuted, thanks again

Paul Rooney 3 years ago

I posted on here some 5 months ago. Wanted to say thanks for the advice, it set my mind at rest at the time and when the TP offered 50/50 it gave me the courage to turn that down. Shortly afterwards they admitted fault and I got my insurance excess back. Thanks Reinhard.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

hi Paul,

Brilliant. Glad I cd help.

kyle lister 3 years ago

hi i was on a 2 lane country road and i was finding my friends driveway so when i knew i was coming up to it i slowed down and turned my left signal on, through out the drive on the road a guy was tailgating me the entire time so i signaled early to let him know that i was stopping soon, so as i turned into the driveway he tried to overpass me going over a yellow line thats dotted on my side of the road, so he was allowed to go around but he went around the second i had turn, hitting my front driver side fender, just today i got a letter from his insurance saying that i was at fault for the accident....? confused how they could even get that i was at fault for this?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Kyle,

Why did they say you were at fault...what were their allegations? It is very common for a insurance company to say in their initial letter to you that "you are at fault." But I'm assuming you must have been in touch with your insurer and they with his. Because you see it could end up as a split liability claim depending on what he says. That's the worst case scenario and the bulk of the blame would lie with him because he was overtaking. (But you see he could just as easily say that you had been parked at the side of the road and when you moved off you hit him). My advice at this stage is make sure you are fully aware of the details of his allegations and hopefully your insurer will do the rest for you.

cat 3 years ago

Hi reinhardBeck,

I was wondering if you could help me with my situation:

The lane configuration is the following ( 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 )

So I come to the traffic light (already turned red) in the 4th lane, and I notice that all the cars in front of me are signaling right and have to wait for pedestrians to cross when it turns green. So I see that in the 3rd lane there's two cars and a huge gap (at least 20ft long... long enough so that I can slide and still be ok) and behind this gap an 18-wheel truck. I was driving a Ford Focus Wagon (so 4.5m - 14.7ft long car), and slide in this spot. Then I wait until it turns green, and no other car departs from the intersection except for the big truck, which ends up smashing my car. So I had no place to advance since the cars in front did not move until seconds later. My car was fully in the 3rd lane, and at a slight angle, which when pushed by the truck from behind started to spin 90 degrees, to become perpendicular to the truck's front. My car's back is also pushed into the side of the car that was in the 4th lane, but only minor scratches resulted from that.

So even police comes and does a report on the incident, because the track that was pushing my car ends up slightly touching the truck in his next lane (2nd lane), and the blocked the intersection for about 10 minutes, until they moved their trucks. All the damages were fairly minor for other cars involved, mainly scratches, except for mine, which has been evaluated at needing $3500 in repairs, which exceeds the cost of buying a similar used one by some stretch, so total loss there. Damage to the rear bumper, rear-left door (since that's where the truck's front ended pushing us most from), and slightly bent rear-left wheel.

Anyway... so after reading the police report, the insurance says that I'm 100% to blame. Which I think is really unfair, considering that I was not doing any illegal moves when going from 4th lane to 3rd (dashed line separating lanes), there was enough space for my car so that I could not only fit fully in the lane, but leave space in front/behind, and I was waiting for a good 30seconds being stationary before the traffic light turned green. The truck driver said he didn't see me. But he could have seen the other cars which did not depart on green light right away. My suspicion is that he was talking to the other truck guy next to him, and did not even bother to look down. Again, my car is a fairly long car (in its class), and should have been visible from inside his cabin.

So do you have any tips in how I should argue with the insurance guys? Their biggest argument is that my car was at an angle and therefore I was not fully within my lane. But I could go and measure the lane width (which is wider than most lanes) and prove that my car could have had enough space in order to be fully inside the lane and at an angle. Thanks!

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Cat,

Am I right to assume your in the USA. If you are the rules of the road might be a bit different to those in the UK. but, there are two points that need to be looked at.

a) you moved from your (4th) lane to a lane (3rd) on your left into a gap while traffic was stationary at lights.

b) you were hit by a truck coming from behind while you were stationary.

The key word in both A and B is "stationary". yes, you were at an angle but was your vehicle completely within the lines marking out the lane?

Is your insurer under the impression that you were in the process of moving into lane 3 when the traffic moved off and you were hit? If so then yes you would be at fault. So what do you say to your insurer.

a) make it clear you were i) stationary & ii) within the white lines.

b) You were "there to be seen" and the truck driver who hit you should have seen you. Even if you changed lanes illegally you were still "there to be seen". (But having said that if you were right in front of the truck and he's high up in his cab he might be looking over you and "miss" you).

In the UK this would be a non-fault claim for you because of points AB assuming it can they can be proved. If anyone was moving (you or the truck) then you would be at fault.

cat 3 years ago

Thanks for your reply. I'm actually in Canada, and the lane numbering comes from the way the police man had explained me how he numbers them (the 4 being next to the sidewalk).

When I changed lanes, all the vehicles in front of me were stationary, including the truck. I then stopped in front of the truck, so my car became stationary until it was hit by the truck. The truck started to move 30 seconds after I was already stopped in front of him.

And yes, my car was within the lines, though I don't know how I can prove this fact. Also consider that the lane was pretty wide in order for the big truck to fit within the lines, and my car is fairly narrow at 1.76m (excluding side mirrors) as it can be seen in this image

cat 3 years ago

I have actually seen the police report summary, and there it says that I switched my lane on green light, which is not true. I hope there's a way to contest the report.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 3 years ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Cat,

1st thing; in the UK at least what the police have to say wouldn't be taken into account unless they actually witnessed the accident. So even if a patrolman says to a driver "you're at fault because you did this or that" the insurance company wont take that as gospel. Having an accident is not a criminal offence and just because he's a policeman it doen't mean his opinion carries any more weight than anyone elses. I'm assuming you have no indep witnesses or CCTV to help you out here? What about the car driver in the 4th lane that you scratched?

The 2nd point here is you can't prove your version or events or at least have enough evident to show that what you say happened could indeed be plausible. So this will go against you as a fault claim unless you can create a sufficent element of doubt. Because you see it's not enough to convince your insurer they have to convince the truck drivers insurer that may be (just may be) the truck driver got it wrong and even then the best outcome will be a split claim. To get a nonfault claim nailed you will need solid evidence; eg witnesses and or cctv.

cat 3 years ago

Hello again,

The car driver in the 4th lane confirms my story, but the insurance never got in contact with him. It's the insurance company, once they got the report, called the truck driver to get his story I guess, then called me and informed me of their decision.

I had a passenger by my side in the car, but I don't think that counts. Also, this happened in the front of a gas station which may have set up some CCTV cameras pointing towards the road. I don't think they are willing to cooperate though (I haven't had a chance to contact them).

reinhard 3 years ago

Hi Cat

It's your insurance company's job to contact any witness and check out any cctv footage. They seem very keen to pay for damages for which they are not liable. You need to find out why they haven't done this

Tom 3 years ago

I was pulling right out of a side road onto a main road as a car coming towards me was turning left into the road I was turning out of, as the car turned left, there was a van behind it which didn't slow down and smashed into my drivers side, buckling all the panels on the side and stopping the drivers door opening. Am I at fault or is the van as he was behind the car turning and in my mind should have slowed down enough so the car had time to turn which was infront of him. (The crash happened as the car was still turning into the side road, but they didn't stop to be a witness.)

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Tom,

Sorry to have to tell you this, but you're at fault for this one. What the van driver was doing or not doing is beside the point. He didn't have the accident nor did he cause one. (why should he have slowed down? when the car ahead of him clearly made its left turn without any problem). You are at fault quite simply because you exited the side street without making sure the road was clear. If you are exiting a side street you need to think about the drivers on the main road but they don't need to think about you at all.

tanya thomas 3 years ago

I was parked in a car park. I was about to reverse out when I noticed the women behind me was reversing but then she stopped. There was a road in between us. I continued to reverse to the right as it was a one way street. There was then a bang. A car was driving the wrong way up the street and had tried to quickly get passed. I reversed into the side of his car. The lady on the opposite side is a witness. She stopped because she did see his car coming as her view point was easier from where she was parked. My insurance says that it is my fault although he was performing an illegal action.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Tanya,

I'm afraid to say your insurance company is right. Believe it or not eventho the other driver was going the wrong way in a 'one way street' it is no defence as far as deciding liability is concerned. The fact remains you were reversing into the road and it will always be your responsibility to check that the road behind you is clear and if you think it is you continue with the maneouvre at your own risk. I know you will be scratching your head on this one but believe me arguing about it with your insurer or the other drivers insurer wont change a thing. The result would be exactly the same if, for example, you had driven into a car that was parked would still be at fault because you should have seen the parked car.

trevor power 3 years ago

hi I was driving along a main road when a car pulled out from a side junction across my pathway hitting my passenger side of car as I attempted to swerve out of her way she pushed me into an oncoming car. she is denying liability as she said I speeded through a red light approx 50 meters further down the road from junction she pulled out off. I have obtained cctv footage that clearly shows me approaching traffic lights in a slow manner and cars following me also never slowed down to suggest there was no obstruction ie red light,however it doesn't clearly show me driving through on a amber signal.were do I stand as it is going through solicitors at moment and ive been without a car for 5 weeks.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi trevor,

Even if you were speeding she is at fault. (if she saw you and in her judgement you were speeding why didn't she wait until you had passed before pulling out...if you were speeding that would be very foolish!)

In any case you have the right of way & it is the duty of anyone exiting from a side street to make sure they can do that safely. Why is it with solicitors your insurer should be dealing with this and making the points I have just made to the other drivers insurer. Finally it is her job to prove her case against you and get cctv footage etc - not you.

Calum 3 years ago

Hi there,

So today I was coming up a steep hill and there was a car at the top of the hill who had a parked car on his side of the road.

We both reached the parked car at around the same time and he did not stop and tried to come around the parked car and onto my side of the road. There was a gap but it was not large enough for him to get through. It was a stalemate situation and I signalled for him to move back as I had right of way (coming up a hill and also parked car on his side).

He proceeded to try and get through the gap and hit both my car and the parked car.

Who is at fault here, he is adamant I should have waited for him and came up the hill at speed, which of course I contest!

Matthew Meyer profile image

Matthew Meyer 3 years ago from San Francisco, CA

Testing your report that you could not post a comment.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Calum,

If you are going to have any chance of convincing his insurer that he is at fault you will need to show that he crossed over to your side of the road. My first thought is that if the parked car and yours were damaged it must be that, as you say, he tried to squeeze through the gap that was too small.

If his version was true only his car (& not the parked car) would have been damaged.

But it wont be easy because (for all you know) he could have told him insurer that he was "passing the parked on top of the hill when this other guy coming up the hill scrapped against me and forced me into the parked car to try and avoid him".

The only people who know what really happened as you two and since neither of you can agree on what happened I'm afraid the insurance companies will in all likelihood recommend a split liabilityclaim.

Alistair 3 years ago

Hi Reinhard,

I recently attempted to reverse out of a car park onto a residential road which also had a mini roundabout a few yards away. (there was also quite a few cars parked on the pavement on both sides too)

As there were cars passing on both sides of the road and incoming traffic from the roundabout I stopped at the end of the drive and waited for a gap.

The mini roundabout cleared and there was a gap in traffic to allow me to proceed with my manoeuvre. As I started to pull away however, the car which had previously stopped to allow the gap lurched forward to almost cut me up. I reversed into her.

There was very little damage to my bumper however as I went into her side front wing, there was some damage.

I'm sure I already know the answer to this but thought I'd ask anyway. Am I at fault?

P.s, Keep up the good work!


Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Alistair,

You're right you do know the answer. You are at fault. But on the plus side if there is minor damage to her car if she agrees that you pay for reps to her car there wont be a fault claim on your policy (just be sure tho that her repairs don't include hire charges or injury so it's important to still report incident to your insurer). Thanks for positive feed back

Davehughes075 3 years ago

I was in a queue of traffic. 5 yards behind there were speed humps. And also the road narrowed to slow traffic down also. It's a 20mph road. There was a cycle lane to the left and the road is narrow on both sides. The was a side road to my right. I was already stopped in the perfect position to turn right. And that's what I decided to do. I indicated looked in mirrors it seemed clear I checked for oncoming traffic and moved off as I got halfway through my turn a motorbike smashed into my side as he was overtaking or filtering. he was Defo going faster than 20. More like 35 judging by the way he and bike flew an the damage to my car. I think he shot out from behind the car behind me and nipped through the bumps. I'm he says I wasn't indicating I'm saying I was but he had lot of people pandering to him and I'm sure there all gonna say I wasn indicating. how do you think this will pan out. in my eyes he was overtaking traffic whilst on the otherside of the road approaching a junction. Also whilst negotiating humps and narrow roads well above the speed limit. The speed was the main contributory factor to the injuries and damage to vehicles. Thanks

Matthew Meyer profile image

Matthew Meyer 3 years ago from San Francisco, CA

Testing comment system. You can delete this.

reinhard beck 3 years ago


In all cases like this that I've had to deal with in past - it's been a split liability decision as 70-30 in your favour. I know you didn't do anything wrong but as you say "it seemed clear" but as you know (!) it wasn't and the logic from an insurance company will be you should have checked again once you'd made sure there was no oncoming traffic.

Davehughes075 3 years ago

Thanks, I do accept that I was partly to blame an I'm annoyed at myself for being involved in an accident. what if he has a few witnesses that all say I wasn't indicating? That's my worry. I think one was the car directly behind me. And a few pedestrians. Because he was injured everyone seemed to be on his side and because he was blaming and pointing me and to try to get people on his side. I have no witness's.

zobs09 3 years ago


If I am sitting at a junction to turn right, and the car coming from the left tries to turn into my junction, cuts the corner (not turning at 90 degrees) and clips my car, are they at fault? I was sitting stationary waiting to turn, saw her coming and stayed. She has effectively cut the corner, came into my lane and clipped me. Although I was shouted at from said lady for driving properly. Any ideas?

Rosie 3 years ago

Please help me!

I was crossing a crossroads during rush hour. the lane closest to me was backed up with traffic which had stopped and left a gap for drivers in the line of traffic I was in to cross through. I stopped, looked through the gaps between the cars and was satisfied there was no traffic in the further lane, I was then inching out when a scooter driver who I had not seen thought I was going to pull out and came off their bike. I did not hit them and do not believe I was over the central markings. There were no witnesses who gave any details to my knowledge. The scooter was written off and I have been found liable for the claim as MY insurance company say that I caused him to fall off. I feel that this is unfair as, 1. I could not have checked any harder for oncoming traffic, 2. He told me he had had this same accident only a few weeks prior. 3. I did not hit him there was no damage to my car. 4. He was at least a car lengths distance from me when he came off and 5. If he was in a car, and driving with due care, acknowledging that cars ahead of him were crossing, he would have been in a position to slow down safetly without wobbling and falling off. Please, am I at fault? Thankyou so much

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi DaveHughes 075,

It shouldn't change anything. Even if you weren't indicating the motorcyclist was overtaking you - that's the main point and if you do that it's at your own risk you need to be sure it's the wise thing to do. That's why the main laibility will rest with him - he could see what was ahead of him (you in other words). witnesses? Well, what did they actually SEE? It's the accident cirxs that will determine liability here not whether you indicated or not - can anyone prove you weren't?

Of-course he'll claim for injury that's par for the course these days.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hello Rosie,

Let me divide this into 2 parts.

1) Since you did edge out of your lane (no matter how careful you think you were) an accident did happen.

2) Since there is no impact your insurer could try and argue that since there was no impact there was no accident and therefore you aren't liable for anything (the scooter could have fallen off for reasons nothing to do with you). But from what you say your insurer believe that Part 1 applies here (its rare actually for an insurer to accept laibility for an accident where there was no actual impact but they will argue that your actions caused him to fall off and that there is a clear link between cause and effect).

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Zobs09

I'm assuming you were at a junction in a side str waiting to move onto main road when a driver on main rd turned into your street and hit you. They will be at fault. The area of damage might help confirm this

(eg: the damage to your car should be on the f/o/s. and to her either on f/o/s also or a long scrap down side of her car). Was there a give way sign at the junction? You're insurer will ask that and you simply say "yes, I was stationary behind it".

Rachkellett1984 3 years ago


Tonight I was involved in an RTC. I was in the left hand lane of two lanes heading up past a junction. My lane was moving and the other that feeds a different way was stationary. In front of a junction which was coming up on my left is a big yellow box to keep the road clear for people turning in and out of the junction. As I was approaching the junction, a car who was turning right into the junction from the opposite side of the road pulled out from the stationary cars to my right straight into my lane. I slammed on the brakes but ended up bumping into the sde of her car. luckily as I was going quite slow there is minimal damage to the cars, but the women was saying it was all my fault as I was going too fast/ she was clear to go as the other lane was stationary etc! In my eyes I was in my lane, I had right of way as she needed to cut across my path to get into the station. She shouldn't have pulled across unless she was certain it was clear! Am I right?

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Rachkellett1984

Yes you are.

Dean13051988 3 years ago

Hi can you answer a query regarding an insurance claim which I have. I was stationary behind a car which then reversed. He admitted it was his fault but then changed his story to his insurers. He is now stating I went into the back of him while he was reversing. Can you confirm who is at fault? Thanks Dean

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Dean,

In your version of events he is at fault. In his voe it all depends why he was reversing - if he was reversing to avoid a car ahead backing into him then his voe wd put you at fault. If he was reversing out of a parking space then he is at fault. You need to stress a) he was reversing and b) you had no time to react. I can see this being settled as split liability with most of blame laying with the other driver.

Dean13051988 3 years ago

Thanks for your reply. It was a narrow road in a car park for only 1 car to pass at a time. His insurance have told me that he was reversing to stop driving over a football which wasn't the case. I did sound the horn twice but he kept coming and before I know he hit me. His insurance have admitted his story doesn't match mines and his doesn't make sense. There was no CCTV as already checked this but luckily my friend has managed to get an independent witness after both parties left the scene. Would this sway it to him being at found at fault? Only problem is I am having trouble getting in contact with this person.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello again Dean,

Yes, an indep would most definately help. Why would you reverse to avoid a football for Pete's sake...(unless you thought it was a bouncing bomb!) you're right his story doesn't make sense. Sounds to me like his insurer are willing to at least consider taking your side if they don't believe his voe. I hope your insurer is making every effort to get hold of that witness.

mark 3 years ago

hi, i came round a blind corner today and there was a pick up van over taking a tractor and trailer. He made no attempt to pull back in and i had to slam on the brakes and steer onto the pavement to avoid a head on collision. He failed to stop but i got his reg and company name. I called them and they spoke to the driver who said he didnt stop as he didnt think there was a need to as we didnt collide. My steering on my car is wonky and the underneath of my bumper is all scuffed. Can i claim against the van driver as the company owner said i couldnt as we handnt hit each other.

Many thanks in advance


reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Mark,

No. a) You didn't hit each other

b) The van was already overtaking the tractor

c) You were coming round a blind bend.

It is very rare indeed for any insurance company accept liability on behalf of their policyholder in cases like this where one driver had to take avoiding action to prevent an accident. Simply because there was no contact so how can (you in this case) prove that the van was overtaking, that he shouldn't have been overtaking and that his actions caused you to hit the kerb? And they can counter with point "C" you were going around a blind corner and should have been more aware of the potential dangers. You of-course cd say the same about the van driver except that he would say "I was already overtaking and I had no time to pull back." So I think this will go against you unless you can show that after you turned the corner the van driver still had plenty of time to see you or/and he is not allowed to overtake on that road. I think the best outcome you can expect is 70-30 against you.

mark 3 years ago

hi, thanks for the reply.

it wasnt a bad blind corner, just a bend really that went into an S bend. The van was over taking through the S bend. surely he should over take in a S bend and wait until the road is straight and he can see ahead? also, my mother was following behind me and saw the whole thing, could she be an independent witness?


reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello again mark,

Your mother doesn't count as an indep witness they have to be some one you don't know. But could you see around the corner? And could he see you? I'm assuming the answer is "no" in both cases. And the basic problem you have is that there was no collision and I cannot see his insurance company accepting any liability for this. Your only chance is if the van driver agrees that your voe is correct in which case his insurer might well conceed that his actions led directly to you having to swerve onto the kerb and causing damage to your car. Other than that the best you can hope for is a split liability decision.

Dean13051988 3 years ago

Thanks for your help. With your expert advice I have managed to settle this. Other party have admitted liability without need of a witness

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello Dean,

Glad I could help.

fireengine 3 years ago

hi I am looking for advice asap and need someone who knows what there talking about , today I was reversing out a parking b ay across the road from my house with cars that come up and down the road I was out the bay and onto the main road a few yards down there is a blind spot corner so im always very cautious because cause cars do speed round there and its a 20mph zone anyway a oncoming car was going fast an d headed right at me I knew she wasn't going to stop so my instinct kicked in as I had 3 kids in back one a baby ,because loads of cars were parked on my side of the road I had no where really to back into I was focused on the car in front going to head on hit me I backed up quick and hit a stationery car I hit the front of her car , the other driver backed down the road and drove off , leaving me to cop the blame the stationery car was parked in a stupid place and there was parking bays directly opposite her free , am I totally fault at here because I think its 50-50 I hit her car yes but I hit her car to avoid an oncoming car who wouldn't stop then drove off and I hit her car cause she was parked in a obstructing place when there clearly parking bays free directly opposite her which does obstruct other people reversing out there bay , I can prove I didn't hit her by reversing out my bay because I would of hit the side of her car not the front and her headlights , any advice please thanks xx

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi fireengine,

Perverse as it might sound you are at fault here. I know you were forced into making a very quick decision by the oncoming car but the fact remains the person you reversed into is also innocent and since it was you who was actually reversing then you will have to take blame.

Anthony! 3 years ago

I was on a 4 lane street about to go through a light, and I was in the furthest left lane without being in the turning lane. There was a vehicle in the start of the turning lane partially sticking out into my lane. I didn't see her, and the right rear corner of her SUV damaged the side of my car. I read this about my state laws online:

"(a) An operator on a roadway divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic:

(1) shall drive as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane; and

(2) may not move from the lane unless that movement can be made safely."

Who is at fault? From my perspective according to this law, she should have remained fully in my lane until there was adequate room for her vehicle to be completely in the turning lane. If she would have done this, I would have seen her in front of me and been able to slow down.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hello Anthony,

A couple of points, am I right to assume that the other vehicle on your left was stationary and about to make left turn and that you to her right and going straight on? And are you from the USA - if you keep in mind I'm in the UK. But to answer your Q...You are at fault

1) because you say you didn't see her. The question her insurer will ask is; why not?

2) you were coming from behind her and she was there to be seen.

3) she was stationary

4) she was making a turn and from what she could see ahead of her she was making that turn safely.

5) she was driving an SUV and had done her utmost (as practical w/i a single lane) to stay in lane.

6) she can say that she was in her lane doing nothing wrong when you ran into her.

- The main point against you here is the area of damage to her car, had the impact damage on both of your cars been along the side the it would have been a split claim, but I don't think it will be in this case.

Happy1983 3 years ago

Hi can someone please help me ?

I was travelling to work the other morning, I came to a notorious mini roundabout

I always approach with caution as children from the local school are known to step out onto the mini roundabout.

I looked left and the car had stopped to give way to me, I looked right and a big blue van was indicating to turn left and take the turning left before me, I went and was on the round about next thing I know bang my brand new car is spun and hits railings.

Two witnesses came straight to me stating that he didn't wait for the van to turn he came straight done didn't stop or slow and flew around the van

Then straight over the top the white circle, straight into my rear side, where my rear wheel is.

People say the damage to my car proves a lot as it is to the rear

But he is now saying I pulled out In front of him, he told the police he was fine and the police made me go to a and e, as my head was bleeding and I had neck pain, everybody is saying make a claim as I was diagnosed with severe whiplash but I hate this compensation culture snd refuse to do so.

The third party are now saying they have whiplash but haven't seen a dr.

I a. So angry as I was on that roundabout and I feel as though I am going to be stitched up as he is playing on the fact he had right of way, yes in a normal case he would but it was clear, his road was not !!!!!!! A van was turning left and he didn't wait he flee around it straight over the top

reinhard beck 3 years ago

hello happy 1983

I'm assuming the car on the right is the one that slammed into you? In which case he is at fault. He has to give way to traffic on his right and area of damage to your car will confirm your version of events (as will the witnesses). The car driver is trying to argue that he has right of way because he is treating the accident cirxs as if you had pulled out in front of him from a side street (in which case you wd have been at fault) but this was on a r-a-b and it's there for a reason! The car driver cannot claim against your policy for damage or injury but you can. Only question I have is you say the driver had stopped but then you say the witnesses say (or seem to say in the way you put it) that the car driver had not stopped but going straight on which might suggest that he was already on the r-a-b when you came across his path in which case both insurers will have to ask a lot of questions from both of you and the witnesses to determine the exact sequence of events and if the insurance company cannot determine with 100% certainty what the sequence of events were then the claim will be settled on a 50-50 basis.

John 3 years ago


I wonder if I could get advise about an accident I was in. I was in the middle lane of 3 approaching a roundabout. The traffic in the left hand lane was queuing and I was following my queue of traffic as that was moving. In front of me a 4x4 pulled out with out any indication it was going to and in reaction to this I pulled to the outside lane, where my drivers door collided with the bumper of a large truck.

The 4x4 took a good gawk at me and the accident before continuing on his was - I was too shaken to get the plate.

The truck driver said at the scene he did not see any car pull out, only me pull to his lane.

A car did stop and I have details as a witness, to say he saw the other car (4x4) pull into my lane, however, they also did not get the registration plate.

The truck driver has a dash board camera, he has said will have to see what is on it.

How would this work out if we do have the 4x4 drivers details on the camera, but he was unaffected by the accident but his pulling out is the cause of my reaction to pull out? Additionally, what would the likely outcome be if there are not the details of this driver?

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi John,

You say the 4x4 "pulled out" - from where? but in any event I'm sorry but you are at fault here. I appreciate your point but the fact is you pulled into another lane and hit another vehicle. His insurer will claim from yours and yours will then have to try and claim from the 4x4 that caused you to swerve. Except they wont even if you know who the 4x4 driver is neither he or is his insurance company will accept any liability.

John 3 years ago


The 4x4 pull out in front of me from the left hand lane of queuing traffic, not from a junction. I have the feeling it will come down as my fault, it is just most infuriating that it would not have happened if he'd just indicated or even waited for his queue to move off some giving him more room/time to manoeuvre safely as opposed to darting out into my path.

Sherms 3 years ago

Hi there.

Today I was approaching Tower Bridge in London. The road leading to it is a double lane, but when it gets closer to the bridge it turns into a single lane. I was on the outside (right) lane where all the traffic was when another car coming from my left tried to squeeze into a small gap between my car and the one on front of mw. As a consequence he scratch the left door of my vehicle with his right wing mirror.

How's at fault??? And why??.....

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Sherms,

The trouble with accidents like this if the drivers involved can't agree about what happened their respective insurers wont be able to sort it out either. You say he moved into your lane and hit you and he will say the exact opposite so 99% of time it's settled as a split claim. However,

Does his lane merge into yours? In other words if you are on the right hand lane do you have right of way? (are there any rd signs saying the - left hand - lane are merging into one? )And where is the damage to your car and to his because it sounds like the damage is to the side of both your cars so only chance you have is to show he was on left hand lane and at point where lanes merge he did try to move into yours. Any CCTV footage? any indep witnesses? - I've said why it's likely to end up as 50-50 but in your favour is fact that he was in left lane that was merging into yours and he should have waited for a gap. It's not your fault but you need your insurer to give you solid help here because no doubt he will try and say you moved into him.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi John,

Trust me I know how you feel and bizzare as it sounds the next time you find yourself in a similar situation you should run into the offending car and then you will be able to legitimatly claim that they pulled out into your path!

DLM 3 years ago


I was in an car accident where the third party has responded to my insurance company claiming that he is not at fault. I am dismayed by this, as it was completely his fault in my view - he crashed into me. Can you help clarify if he is likely to be viewed at fault despite him contesting this?

I was on a dual carriageway sat in the right hand lane waiting stationary at a set of traffic lights at a junction, ready to cross straight over. Upon the traffic lights turning green, I drove straight ahead as intended. I was about halfway across the junction when the third party came from the opposite side of the dual carriageway and turned right, did not stop in the middle section of the junction and ploughed into my vehicle, damaging the front driver side corner. The whole of the front of his vehicle was damaged. As I say, he is now somehow contesting that he is not at fault. It was early in the morning before any rush hour traffic so I had no witnesses in vehicles surrounding us, but someone from a nearby business came over and said they believed they had CCTV which would support me. This now looks to be difficult to identify the vehicles as it was dark which concerns me. Can you advise?

reinhard beck 3 years ago


Why is the other side holding you at fault? And what is your insurer doing about it? In my opinion the other driver is at fault because he turned into you and the damage to both your cars will confirm this.

Use the CCTV footage if you can - I take your point about it being dark and that making it difficult to identify the vehicles but if the other side are adament you are at fault then they have no reason to doubt that the CCTV is accurate and true because it would "confirm" their version of events. So once they accept that the car hitting the side of yours is their insured it will confirm that actually their driver is at fault. Worst case senario in these sort of accidents is a split claim but that is usually when both parties are in the middle of making a turn...he point here is that you weren't.

Sherms 3 years ago

hi reinhard beck. Thank you for your answers! I'm not sure If there's CCTV in that street, although I believe there is as this street leads onto Tower Bridge!. There's no marks on the road showing indicating lanes merging and no witnesses. The damage on my car is on the passenger door and the sliding door (it's a small van) the damage on his vehicle is on his right mirror, front right arch wheel and driver's door.

I'm 100% sure there's no rd marking on the street.... so would you say is a 50-50 claim?

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hello again Sherms,

My advice prepared for a 50-50. But In your favour (perhaps) is the area of damage which seems to suggest that you wouldn't move into the left hand lane because

a) the left h/l was merging into yours so why would you move into the wrong lane?

b) even if you decided to do that would you if you could see a lorry next to you?

c) why didn't the lorry driver see you? he should have done.

Get your inurer to look at google maps and make sure of the lanes and there must be cctv on Tower Bridge! If he is trying to squeeze into a gap which isn't there he is at fault if it can be shown his lane merges into yours you have the right of way.

Susan miah 3 years ago

I was stationary at a give on main road , after checking right and lwft i proceeded to continue straight ahead when i got to middle of juction i was hit full force by a corsa who caused injury to my daughter on passenger side and door and wing of my car which then pushed me into car on other side . The corsa crumpled and my car is write off. He laid blame on me so did witness im truly shocked by his lies but he had a 12 plate and young driver who drove at speed . And i thouroughly checked before proceeding , whose at fault

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Susan,

So you were stationary on a main road. was this a 'T' junction or a 'X' road?

If you were on a main rd and the other driver was exiting a side road then he is at fault. But if this accident happened on a 'X' who has priority needs to be established (if possible). From your first few words though it sounds like you were stationary at a "give way" marker on the road.

That would suggest the accident happened because you failed to "give way". Saying you "thoroughly checked" is no defence because if you really had wouldn't you would have seen him? Nor is his speed a defence. If he has the right of way then it is your responsibility to let him exercise that right. In which case you would be at fault. If his witness is indep then that only strengthens his case against you.

Tim K 3 years ago

I was driving in a car park and had slowed down; it is a shopping centre car park so it is a normal road essentially with bays along either side. There was a car behind me and I decided to turn left into a empty bay (drive into the bay, not reverse). I didn't indicate to turn left. As I was half way in the bay a car hit me in the passenger side. She claimed she thought I was going into a right bay and attempted to undertake me driving through the empty bays to get around me. I have pictures to prove this however who is at fault?

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Tim K

She is.

Shelly L 3 years ago

I was travelling along a road approx. 15-20mph and a car in a minor road pulled out and hit me as I passed the junction. There was a witness who refused to give me her details and only gave them to the other driver. The third party are asking for a 70/30 split liability and quoting previous case law. The witness statement says I had been indicating for a while and hadn’t cancelled my indicator and that I pulled out slightly as though I was going to turn into the junction. However there are inconsistences in her statement. She stated that I was in a right lane and indicated to left lane and she let me in front of her. She said there were two people in my car. I was the only person in my car so if she can’t even get that right how can she say I was indicating and I pulled out as though I was going to turn. Is there any case law or anything I can do to contest. My insurance company are going to accept the 70/30 split but said If I can emailed a case to them by Wednesday 27th and it was deemed relevant they would put it forward.

Shellyl2821 3 years ago

Please can you reply urgently to my comment above I really need to do something to prove I wasn't at fault :-/ I only have until Wednesday to put a case forward x

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Shellyl 2821

There is a case law that applies to your case (but unfortnately I can't remember the case title) but it used to be the case that if you were on a main rd indicating left and some else in that side road (to your left) saw you and exited the side road and it you then you were held at fault because you had been indicating left. But that has been amended and now the driver in the side street has to wait to see if you really are turning left and if they don't and they hit you...they are at fault. (Remember you cannot be held liable for what other drivers think you might or might not do you can only be held liable for what you actually did or didn't do). And as you are on the main road you have right of way. Sorry that I don't remember the name of the relevant case law.

Shellyl2821 3 years ago

Thanks I really need to find the case law to argue it as my insurance are going to accept a 70/30 split and I'm not happy!

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Shellyl2821,

There is a case law that applies to you but like I said I can't remember it but some one dealing with liability should and they should also explain why they are going for 70/30. But I repeat it was the other drivers responsibility to take no action until they were sure of what you were going to do THINKING that you were going to turn into their side street because (allegedly) you were indicating is not good enough. You could have been indicating to show you intended to park at the side of the road for example. They need to prove their case and they can't.

Shellyl2821 3 years ago

Thanks, they said they were going to accept a 70/30 based on the witness statement saying I was indicating and the case law they presented. I have sent them an email with pictures of roads etc to try and disprove her case. I also sent details of wickens & khan 2012 and Davis and Swindwood 2002 which where simple cases ruled 100% fault of Tyne driver that pulled out of minor road. The 2012 case also had a witness like me. Just hope it's enough for my insurance company to agree to fight as I'm not happy as a 70/30 split. The witness knew the driver I just can't prove it. It's annoying as I know I wasn't indicating.

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Shellyl2821,

Even if you were indicating its irrelevent. If I'm waiting to cross the road and see a car coming indicting to turn into a side street I wait to see if it will turn left before stepping out onto the road. The other driver shd have done the same. You can't be guilty of something that the other driver thought you might do!

Nickijk 3 years ago

Hi, I was on a busy 3 lane roundabout (with my 11 month old baby also in the car) going straight ahead. I was in the left hand lane at 6'o'c, I enter the roundabout after giving way giving a left signal just after a pass the first exit. As I attempt to leave the roundabout at 12'o'c a car entering from the exit I've just passed (9'o'c) enters the roundabout (and quite fast too) after quite obviously not giving way, I brake and attempt to swerve (luckily no one was next to me in the middle lane) although as I was already steering left we collide. The driver got out and kept saying over and over 'he didn't see me'. The police were there immediately, although I've no idea what he said to them?? His damage was quite bad and all along the right hand side of his vehicle, mine is at the front left corner, more to the left corner, hardly no damage on the front basically the left lights are all smashed and I've been told the car is write off due to it needing new bonnet and side panel. Well now the guy is saying I drove at him at speed whilst he was fully established on the roundabout!! Even the policeman on the scene said its a notorious roundabout for accidents but it appears the guy clearly didn't give way, does he have a case? He suffered a bump to the head and was bleeding quite a bit, me and my son were absolutely fine with no injuries, I'm losing so much sleep over the stress of this. Thanks Nicki

reinhard beck 3 years ago

Hi Nickijk,

if he realy was established on the r-a-b how come the damage to his car is at the front on the right hand side when yours is on the f/o/s corner?

He is trying it on. Having said that proving laibility on accidents that happen on r-a-b can be very difficult. But one way to prove your claim is to describe (as you have done) where you entered the r-a-b and exited it and just as important where were you going? Likewise the other driver needs to explain the purpose of his journey (eg if he says I was at "X" and was going to "Y" then perhaps this will confirm he could only enter the r-a-b at 9 o'clock in which case as you were already on the r-a-b (as I think the area of damage will prove) and therefore had the right of way. If you drove at him "at speed" why did he decide to enter the r-a-b anyway if he could see that? If you were "driving at speed" why is the damage to the f/o/s to your car and not at the front?

If his arguement is he didn't see you then he is at fault because he should have done.

Nickijk 3 years ago

Thank you Reinhard, that makes me feel so much better, I'm pretty sure he is trying it on and basically just didn't look and give way, hence him saying he didn't see me.

This happened over 5 weeks and I just received a letter from the police today saying they have come to the conclusion the other driver was 'sufficiently blameworthy', does this mean he won't have a case?

His insurance company have called today to say they would like to come out and assess the damage to my car still.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Nickjik,

Well, the police report wont help him obviously but on the other hand the police aren't witnesses and an insurer can quite easily argue that what the police have to say carries no more weight than anyone else.

The fact that his insurer want to see what the damage to your car is does not mean they are accepting liability they only want to know a) does the damage show the accident happened in the way you say it did and b) how much will it cost to put right.

Phil Ko 3 years ago

Hello Reinhard,

I've just been involved in an accident. My car was stationary and parked beside the kerb of a 30mph zone main road within the city centre of Liverpool, UK.

I approached my car from the drivers side, opened the door amidst light traffic and got inside..before i had the chance to close the door, i was hit by an oncoming double decker bus all within the space of 3 seconds.

The damage to my drivers door is very heavy and has crumpled from the impact of collision. The bus has sustained damage to its front left hand corner.

The drivers first comment to me when we exchanged details was "that will teach you to open your door in front of a bus again won't it?" Which pretty much infuriated me!

I am currently awaiting assessment and feedback from my insurance company.

What is your advice and take on this one?

Kind regards.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hello Phil Ko,

Rule of thumb here is...if your door was already open you're not at fault. If you open your door into a passing vehicle then you are at fault.

umalik282 3 years ago

Hi Reinhard,

i was involved in an accident where i was crossing a junction in my car.i checked visbility from all angles and it was clear for me to cross. i crossed the major road and entered the minor road.

upon entering the minor road, a child decided to cross the road in front of me. my speed was minimal so i covered my brakes and was stationary. the child found it amusing to take his time crossing the road and i waited patiently.

after several seconds, i feel an impact and realise that a car from the main road has hit the back/left light area of my car. my car was predominantly all in the main road bar the possibility of potetntially 5% still not crossed the give way road markings. this would not have been the case had i not had to stop for the boy who was crossing.

my insurer is holding me at fault but i dont agree with the decision. the boy was not crossing as i started my crossing. i drive an mpv and the car that hit me was a range rover. surely the range rover should have seen that i was stationary albeit on the minor road?

am i within my rights to dispute these individual circumstances?

Paul 3 years ago

I was waiting to turn left out of work, I could see a car traveling down the main road towards me so i was waiting for him to pass. As the car got closer he put his signal on to turn left which was the road i was on. He slowed down adjusted his car to make the turn so I edged out and at the last minute he changed his mind and hit me. Who is at fault

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi Paul,

Don't you mean he he was turning right into your road? Anyway, the point is you would be held at fault for pulling out into the path of a car on a main road. Had he hit you while you were still stationary at the junction he would be at fault but the fact is you edged out. That is what caused the accident not the fact that he changed his mind. Your insurer will probably explain that you should have waited to be sure that that he was going to turn into your road or not. When you were sure then you should have edged out.

Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

Hi umalik282,

It's a bit harsh but you are at fault. Not because you did anything wrong but because the range rover can't beheld responsible either for the fact you were forced to come to a halt because of that child with part of your car still on the main rd and over the give way sign. So technically (if you like) you are to blame. Maybe the other driver did see you and maybe he could see that you were stationary but it would have put him and possibly others at risk if he had decided to take avoiding action because the back end of your car is sticking out into the main road. So he did the right thing by driving straight on because had he not done so he could have been the cause of another accident.

zack 2 years ago

ok i was involved in an accident the other day. i was pulling out of a parking lot the other day and an 18 wheeler stopped and flashed me for the right away. i then proceeded forward and looked in the other lane and nothing was there. i continue forward and a suv came into the other lane from behind the 18 wheeler and proceeded to hit me. i know she saw my vehicle and i didnt hear her apply the brakes. who is in the wrong??

zack 2 years ago

ok i was involved in an accident the other day. i was pulling out of a parking lot the other day and an 18 wheeler stopped and flashed me for the right away. i then proceeded forward and looked in the other lane and nothing was there. i continue forward and a suv came into the other lane from behind the 18 wheeler and proceeded to hit me. i know she saw my vehicle and i didnt hear her apply the brakes. who is in the wrong??

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Zak,

If the SUV was overtaking the 18 wheeler they will be partly to blame but 80% of the fault will lay with you.

saroth 2 years ago

Im driving in the rain and everyone is slowing down approaching a merger point with a cross street and the car in front of me slows down like everyone else but then decides to take a right into this small parking lot so suddenly brakes harder and tries to squeeze into the parking lot where another car was attempting to exit out of. Needless to say she had to bank the turn extremely sharp at a high speed so in trying to avoid it I braked hard but it was too late and i hit her back bumper towards the left. My car will most likely be totaled while her car got away with just a dislodged and dinged up bumper. However, after i hit her she obviously couldn't take the turn as sharp and she end up hitting the person trying to exit the parking lot. Who's fault is this?

Pete Woodcock 2 years ago


Just to update you as i said I would. I was the driver hit by a vehicle exiting a side road, his insurers recently offered to pay 80% which we refused then they offered substantially more with my solicitor saying to accept. I was worried that they didn't accept full responsibility but he said simple maths prove that they do accept it, but just won't say it.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Pete Woodcock,

If you were on a main rd and hit by a vehicle exiting a side street they are 100% liable and I can't see why anyone would be able to argue about that. Simple maths? What does your insurer say? Are you loosing any of your NCB or paying any part of the claim with your excess? If ans is "no" then they are accepting full laibility. Get it in writing if you can or at least make sure your insurer has verbal confirmation that they are accepting full liability.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Saroth,

You are I'm afraid. It's always the responsibilty of the driver behind to leave enough braking space bt them and the car ahead (esp in the wet) so that they are ready and prepared for any eventuality. Your insurer will have to cough up for damage to all the cars involved.

Tim K 2 years ago

Hi Reinhard,

I sent you a message of which you kindly answered for me. The third party has stated that I was indicating left (?!) and that they thought I was turning right so they decided to undertake me thus misleading them. Now, the insurance company advised me that they were likely to take a 50/50 settlement because I should have been aware that she was there and that I turned into the bay whilst she was undertaking me and not paying attention . . . I'm completely lost for words and don't really know what to say or do.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Tim K,

Accidents in parking lots and on r-a-b's are usually settled 50-50 because all too often it is unclear who did what and when. But this case sounds more straight forward. You need to ask your insurer why you are liable (in part) for an accident in which you were hit by a driver coming from behind you? As a driver you need to be aware of what is going on ahead of you. It was her responsiblity to be aware of you; not visa versa. If she thought you were going to turn right why didn't she wait until you had instead of guessing? The only way this could go 50-50 is if the other side allege you were reversing out of a parking bay directly into her path. I think your insurer are taking the easy way out for the reasons I gave above. Also, if you mislead her why then are you only 50% at fault? Where does the other driver think her 50% of the blame lies?

Tim K 2 years ago

Hi Reinhard,

Thanks again for your swift response. The third party have already admitted to being behind me, so I don't think they could say I was pulling out.

What my insurance company have said is that I wasn't paying attention to the road and should have checked my wing mirrors to make sure she wasn't undertaking me. The thing is she undertook me whilst I was performing the the turn; surely it's not reasonable to expect me to constantly check my far side wing mirror for someone to undertake me whilst pulling into a bay where nobody should be driving, especially considering there was another car parked there. the whole thing just seems completely unreasonable.

As far as I am concerned, I was indicating left, I turned left, she thought I was turning right so decided to undertake me and couldn't stop in time to avoid a collision. Whilst in the turn there was nothing I could do to prevent what had happened.

Thanks again for your advice I will pose these questions to my insurance company.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hello again Timk,

I can see their logic up to a point. You should check your mirror BEFORE you make your maneouvre left but if you were already making that manoeuvre when you were hit I don't think their logic holds much water. If the damage to your c ar shows impact is to your rear passanger side that would seem to prove your version of events. Even if at the end of the day your insurer doesn't feel there is enough conclusive evidence to prove your voe I still feel 50-50 is harsh more like 20-80 in your favour would be nearer the mark. If you are making a turn into a parking bay or into a side street you need to check before you make that turn it is safe for you to do so but likewise if you think that the car ahead is about to make a turn that would not be a good time to decide to overtake. But if you can prove that you were fully engaged in making your turn you cannot be held responsible for someone else's action.

Katie Jayne Shuck profile image

Katie Jayne Shuck 2 years ago from Burntwood

Hi after your advice - I'm driving down a main road at no more than 30mph I see a car pulling off a driveway and into the road between two parked cars I beginn to break she continues to pull out putting her foot down when she sees me. Due to her being about to strike my be chicle by where my son was sitting I had to take evasive action n steer into along n up a curb narrowly missing a lamppost. The girl was going to drive off until my partner got out to get her details. She wouldn't leave her name but have a phone number n we got her registration, I'm 21 weeks pregnant with twins n had reduced fetal movements as a result of the incident n ended up in a and e then transferred upto maternity n have got to go back again today for more tests. Do I have a clAim she is saying not as I chose to swerve but I had no choice but to take evasive action due to her driving. I have logged with police due to her trying to drive away and also my insurance company please help

Katie Jayne Shuck profile image

Katie Jayne Shuck 2 years ago from Burntwood

Also may I add I had my headlights on n was clearly visible to her she looked at me and acelorated to try and beat me out

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Katie,

She is right I'm afraid. Yes, she was reversing out of her driveway but how will you be able to prove that she was directly responsible what happened to you. There was no impact between you so as far as her insurance company will be concerned there was no accident. You did swerve and they will argue that was your decision and they can easily argue that you either a) over reacted or b) you simply lost control of your vehicle. The view insurance companies take in cases like this is that if you make a manoeuvre for whatever reason (a real or imagined risk) you have to take any consequences that might follow.

Katie 2 years ago

Argh is there nothing I can do she was driving out not reversing and put her foot down when she sw me there was no imagined risk I'm 21 weeks pregnant with twins and had a 19 month old sat on that side if the car the money I don't care about but should at least be on her file

ray cherry 2 years ago

hi had a accident 3 months ago and the insurance is now saying it's going to be a 50/50 liability.Which i'm not to happy about.i was filtering by stationary traffic about 15 mph (was on a bright yellow motorbike and also had a bright yellow helmet on) when a car pulled out the car park on the left taking me out never had a chance to brake.on the police report he states that the lorry waved him out and i had come out of i'm aware filtering can be dangerous which is why i was going only about 15 mph.the accident happen on a Sunday at a very well known location just outside matlock . which in my opinion should have heightened the drivers awareness to motorcycles. if you could help with your opinion. thanks

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Ray,

Your insurer is right on this one. (When you say "filtering" I'm assuming you mean you were moving in bt the stationary lines of traffic). That's why you are having to accept 50-50 because you were still moving forward when all other traffic was stationary and if you were going bt lines of traffic and overtaking them. (again I'm assuming the lorry was between you and the other driver).

The other driver has to accept some fault too for exiting a side street without being 100% sure it was safe to do so. I'm not sure it will finish 50-50 tho more like 80-20 in your favour. You have to be aware that by saying "I'm aware that filtering can be dangerous" is (to me anyway) and admission of guilt. If you know it's dangerous why do it? How fast your going doesn't fast (and how big) is the other bloke?

ray cherry 2 years ago

more like overtaking than filtering as their wasn't any traffic on the other side of the road at the time.the thing what is bugging me is that where it happened i was looking to pull into the traffic as a speed camera was coming up and solid white lines and also the fact that i was never even given the chance to brake as one minute i was riding then bang flying in the air,just thankful i wasn't going any faster

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again Katie,

Ok so she wasn't reversing but that doesn't change anything as far as liability is concerned. There was no impact so as far as her insurer is concerned what happened to you has nothing to do with them. Their response will be a flat denial that their insured is in any way responsible. As far as they are concerned they will accept her version of events as there is no evidence it's not true. Apart from that they can merely point out that , even if they accept your version, you were still the author of your own misfortune. The only way an insurer can be forced to accept liability is if their policyholder admits liability and says says; "yes I raced out of my driveway and forced the other lady to take evasive action".

Katie 2 years ago

Thanks for that just so frustrating it won't even get marked on her file x

scot 2 years ago

Hi , can you help please I reside in the uk. I had an incident which involved a young driver I was folowing. what happened was that he slowed down in front of me and pulled to the side (walkway side) and I assumed that he was stopping there i indicated and proceeded to overtake him, he then indicates right and turns I saw he was doing this and sped up to avoid him, unfortunately as we were both doing a maneuver at the same time I had to take evasive action and mounted the kerb bust a tyre and our cars hit each others wings. He is claiming it was my fault and is demanding that I pay for the damage to his car. So my question is, in your opinion who would you say the insurance company would say is at fault me or him?.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

hi Scott,

It's a split liability this one.

a) because you assumed (incorrectly) that he was pulling to the side of the road to stopand started to over take. b) for his part he moved off from the side of the road into your path without looking that it was safe for him to do so.

(a very similar scenario that always ends as a split claim is on a duelc/w or on a motorway where 2 drivers collide as you did with him each one blaming the other by saying the other was moving into his lane).

Saiful 2 years ago


Your advice would be greatly appreciated.

My vehicle (BMW X3) was on the right hand lane of 2 lanes turning right. There are 3 lanes going straight ahead on the left hand side. I wanted to be going straight so while stationary at the traffic light I indicated and pulled across the left of the 2 lanes turning right. The front of my vehicle was at 10 o'clock and the vehicle was stationary, waiting to go into the right hand lane of the 3 lanes going ahead.

The third party vehicle (Merc C Class) drove into mine after about 5 seconds of me being fully engaged into the maneuver. It clipped the rear wheel arch and the impact forced my vehicle into an almost 90 degree angle and the third party vehicle to slip under my side skirt.

My insurance company seems to be quite lazy in arguing the case and wants to accept liability.

It would be really helpful to hear your thoughts.

scot 2 years ago

OK so in your opinion its a 50/50 split then?. I have spoken to the young drivers dad who said his son is on his insurance. He told me he would contact his insurance company to see what their take on it would be and said he would get back to me although this was a week ago today and I have still not heard anything from him, do you think I should assume he has been told the same thing and has decided to not contact me back and leave it at that?. I have already had my tyre changed and have arranged for chips away to come and repair my wing. Should I just get the repairs done to my car or contact my insurance company and see what they say or just as the old saying goes let laying dogs lay. Thank u mate.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hello again Scot,

Well, your insurance policy will say that you need to report any incident (whether or not you intend to claim on your policy). Also you don't know what he has told him insurer and it's best to have your version on record (he could get in touch with your insurer weeks or months later alleging all sorts - damage to his car you are not responsible for and personal injury etc etc). Keep your receipts for any repairs to your car. Your policy will only be affected if your insurer agree any pay out to the other car.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

hello Saiful,

Have I got this right. There are 5 lanes in total. 2 lanes on the right bear right and the other 3 go straight on?

Ordinarily if you are hit in the rear you are not at fault since the driver behind you is expected to keep a safe (braking) distance behind you. However, you were in the process of changing lanes and postioned at "10 o'clock" in your "new" lane and you weren't therefore fully established in that lane. Your actions denied the 3rd party his breaking distance and your actions gave them no chance to avoid you (and so they can't be accused of being too close) so I would have to agree with your insurer - sorry.

Saiful 2 years ago

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

Saiful 2 years ago

Sorry, one thing I forgot to ask, is this the case even though my vehicle was stationary? I thought I read something at the top of the post that said "It's not your fault if your vehicle is stationary".

Would it not be a case for me to try to prove that due to the point of impact (rear wheel arch and no damage to door) and the fact the third party vehicle was lodged under my side skirt may suggest that I could not have pulled out in front as they allege.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again Saiful,

That's true what I said at the top of this blog but here you decided you needed to change lanes and did so and came to a stop in your new lane at an (10 o'clock) angle. And that is the crucial changed lanes into the path of an oncoming vehicle already established in that lane. To be frank I think the area of damage to your car proves that you are at fault. All you can try to argue is that the other driver had time to stop except I don't think that is possible. The other driver was proceeding correctly in their lane travelling straight on when you skipped into their lane and then came to a stop giving them no chance to react to avoid a collision.

Khan 2 years ago

Hi had an accident. Was driving down a one way road i was in the middle lane decided to get into the left lane heading towards the motorway. As I got into the left lane car pulled out of a give way. My passenger front wing hit his driver side front wing which caused my car to shunt onto the right lane and my driver side back door scraped a car in the middle lane. Who's fault isit? I heard if you are at a give way u have to give way regardless. Third party arguing i was driving fast. Who's fault isit? Btw it was a 3. Lane road heading in one direction.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi Khan,

They are at fault because as you say at a "give way" sign a driver needs to give way (and how fast you were travelling is beside the point). Besides if he knew you were going too fast why did he decide to pull out?

Khan 2 years ago

Thank you for your reply mate.

I'm just worried that it might go 50/50 or im at fault. Because i only have third party. So no matter what I was doing his at fault Right?

Reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hello again Khan,

If you are TPF&T or TPO that just means you are not covered for any damage to your car in an accident where you are at fault which is not the case here.

Juleah 2 years ago

Hi, I was in a car accident last night. No one was hurt but I'm not sure who's at fault I talk to my insurance company tomorrow. So this is what happened I was bringing a friend home from work because she called and said she was stranded. Well the weather was bad it was snowing and I really didn't want to go but being a friend I picked her up. On the way to her house I was getting off the exit and my car spun i didn't hit and thing but as I was about to back up and keep going someone hit my passenger side door from behind me is that my fault?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Juleah,

I'm not sure what you mean by "getting off the exit" or why you were going to back up? But from what you say (and bear in mind I'm not completely sure of the facts) you wont be at fault if you were stationary but if "getting off the exit" means you were exiting her driveway (for example) then you'd be at fault. If you are saying that you were driving off the exit and you spun and stopped to regain control and a car behind you then ran into you then they would be at fault. Not sure though why you were about to back up though

em12 2 years ago


I was sat in traffic lights at a roundabout on the with a couple of cars in front of me. When the lights turned green I heard emergency services, I approached the roundabout with caution. I slowed down along with the car to my left and noticed a police car approaching from the left, I slowed down to give way to the police and the car hit me from behind. The case is now going to county court am I at fault?

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi Em12,

Was it the police car that hit you from behind? I don't understand why it's going to court. It's a simple insurance claim. I assume when you say that you "I slowed down to give way" you didn't move to your left or right. If you didn't you wouldn't be held at fault. If you did you may well be held at fault if it is decided that your manoeuvre infringed on the braking distance of the car that hit you.

em12 2 years ago

Sorry. No a different car hit me from behind I was approaching the roundabout, he obviously didn't see or hear the police car which was approaching from the left but all the cars around us slowed to give way. I did not move left or right I stayed in my own lane but slowed down

reinhard beck 2 years ago


As far as I'm concerned you're not at fault. The police car on your left is a bit of a red herring here because (for example) if you'd slowed down because you were approaching T/lights or to let a pedestrian cross the road the result would have been exactly the'd have been rear ended.

SalBow 2 years ago


I had left my driveway turning right, but had to stop in the road as there was a van parked to my right obscuring my view. A car came up overtaking the parked van and hit my car. At the point of impact he was on the wrong side of the road already partially past the van and I was clear of my driveway. There was a small amount of damage to my car at the front in the middle (basically just shattered my number plate and a bit of the grill) but he had damage to the front of his car only on the passenger side. Whose fault is this?

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi SalBow,

If he was already overtaking when you stopped in the middle of the rd then you will be at fault (and that does sound to me what happened here) but if not: if he only started to overtake the van after you had come to a stop then he would be at fault - because he would have made a concious manoeuvre that took him directly into your path. However if he argues that your were exiting your driveway onto the rd just as he was passing and therefore you drove into him then the best case scenario would then be 50-50. And I'm guessing that is what he'll tell his insurance company.

Jacob 2 years ago


I was turning left in an intersection(3 lane traffic), the traffic lights were green on my side and when I turn to the 3 lane which mean I almost done it some one just came from the mainroad and hit my right side. I did check the traffic before I turn and I am pretty sure it's clear. But I have no idea how this car can hit me. I am sure he is pretty fast and it's in downtown. The police said it's my fault and I feel like it shouldn't be my fully response.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Jacob,

I'm not quite getting it. When you say "some one just came from the main road" do you mean they were turning into the same road that you were exiting by turning left...or were you exiting that rd onto a main road when a car already on the main rd and going straight on hit you?

In the 1st scenario they would be at fault, in the 2nd example you'd be at fault.

mikeylopzzz 2 years ago


I was in a car accident the other day. I was preparing to make a left turn at a residential T-intersection. It's a one lane, 2-way street. I waited for on coming traffic to clear to make my left with blinker indicater, and when it was cleared, I proceeded and then a car that was parked on the opposite side of the road entered the street and hitting me on the front passenger bumper. The other car hit me with their front passenger bumber. So when he was parked, his car was facing my direction. And he happenend to park by the corner where the "T" intersects.

After the impact, I was parallel to the street I was making the left for. Whose fault is this?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello mikeylopzz,

Were you turning left onto the main rd or where you on the main rd and turning into a side street? I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say the other car was on "the opposite side of the rd" and I don't see how both of you can have damage on your f/n/s bumper. However (provisionally) would say that you and the other car will have to share laibility.

mikeylopzzz 2 years ago

Hi Reinhard Beck,

Thanks for replying.

As for the accident, I was on the main road (which is a 2 way street with curb parking on each side) making a left into a side street, so the other car is on the other side of the road parked by the curb. So he is trying to come into the main road from his parked position and as soon as I made the left, he pulls into coming traffic and hits me with his front right bumber to my front right passenger bumber (we are driving in California).

Hope this help make clearer sense. Thanks

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again mikeylopzzz,

I'm in the UK and here the other driver would be at fault simply because he was moving into traffic from a parking spot at the side of the rd and it would be up to him to make sure it was safe for him to do so. Mind you (I might as well warn you) if he says to his insurer something different; eg, that he was already on the road when the accident happened then it will go 50-50 unless you have independent witnesses or cctv to call on.

mann28 2 years ago

hi i'm in sydney and was driving a rigid truck. i approached a roundabout which had two lanes both going straight and i was in the right lane when my truck's back hit the car which was on the left lane. i even didn't realise that. my destination was approx 50m after the roundabout on the right hand side. she followed me and told me that you hit my car. whose fault is this in this matter.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi mann28

Why did the rear of your truck hit the car? Did you swing left to make that right turn? And did that mean you strayed into the l/h/lane? If answer to both is "yes" then you would be at fault. She says that "you hit my car" which doesn't sound right...she ran into the back of your truck. She needs to prove that you strayed into her lane.

Jbow 2 years ago

I was making a u turn out of my drive way, when a car comes out of nowhere. She was speeding in a residential neighborhood and her kids had on no seat belts or car seats. I had two witnesses in my car at the time and they both seen her speeding. She even said she seen me but proceeded to try and maneuver out of my way. My car was already in the street when it hit her tire. Now she is trying to sue me. My whole front bumper and airbags are deployed. She was at a stop sign and I was already in the street.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Jbow,

You're going to be held at fault for this one simply because you were exiting your driveway when you hit the car on the road. Whether or not they were speeding etc the fact remains they have priority. The fact that she tried to manoeuvre out of your way shows that she had no chance to avoid you.

Andy 2 years ago

I signalled left at a parking space and stopped my vehicle in a position ready to commence a reverse parallel parking manoeuvre. As I started to reverse I heard a horn sound and could see a vehicle close behind in my mirrors but assessed that I still had sufficient room to complete the manoeuvre and continued. The vehicle behind came past with the driver gesticulating and parked a little way in front on the opposite side of the road followed by the car that was behind him. It transpired that the driver behind me had reversed into the driver behind him as he claimed that had he not done so I would have crashed into him. He wanted my details but I refused on the grounds that there was no need as my vehicle had not collided with anything and had clearly signalled my intentions. He took photographs of my vehicle. Was I correct to refuse to provide details?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Andy,

Yes. As you say you weren't involved in any incident. The fact of the matter is even if your actions did cause him to reverse into a driver behind him - he is at fault; not you. You cannot be held liable for somethig he thought you might or might not do. Weirdly enough what he should have done is stayed where he was and if you reversed into him he could then hold you at fault. Besides, how can he prove any of his allegations? That is all they are and allegations is not evidence. He saw you ahead of him he shd have - stopped or tried to go round you.

In fact he could put a claim against the driver who hit him in the rear.

Anne89076 2 years ago


I was in car accident I was driving on the main road and was over taking parked cars. A car from a side street went through yield right of way sign, came out at speed to take a right turn and I swerved to avoid her and hit a garden wall. I contacted the police and they took statements. She said her vision was obstructed by the parked cars.

Now my insurance company says because there was no impact from both cars her insurance might not pay out.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi Anne89076,

They probably wont. The logic being is that their insured didn't actually hit you therefore your accident has nothing to do with them as far as they are concerned and they will therefore dispute that their insured was in anyway responsible. They will ask themselves since it was your decision to swerve (and hit the garden wall) that is your hard luck. There is no evidence that their insured made you do it. Lets just hope the other driver says that yes; she did come out of the side street and gave you no reaction time to respond. Police statements might help but 99 times out of 100 drivers in your situation have no recourse to claim against the other drivers policy.

Dmrls 2 years ago

Hi I recently got into an accident. The driver was getting out of a neighborhood street going onto the Main Street, she didn't wait for me to pass so had to brake then she brakes and stops. So I go around her and then she decides to make a u turn and she hits me. Is it my fault or hers?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Dmrls,

Anyone exiting a side street onto a main rd and hits some one on the main rd are fully at fault. (I don't understand the bit about her making a u-turn tho. But no matter. She is at fault).

Dmrls 2 years ago

It was a two lane road. So when I was going around her when she stopped I guess she decided she wanted to turn around. Is it still her fault or mine if I went over to the other lane?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Dmrls,

If she was exiting a side street and hit you on the main road she is at fault. If she was doing any kind of turn it is her responsibilty to do it without putting other rd users at risk

Dmrls 2 years ago

Thank you so much for your help!

cw 2 years ago

Hi there,

I was parallel parking outside my house as I always do, I was completely straight against the path and was just a case of reversing back toward my sisters car. Now we always park on the street, meaning cars then have to drive around our parked ones. I was about maybe 4-5 inches away from the back of my sisters car ready to stop and get out, next thing I know,some woman has driven into the back right hand side of my car. There was no where for her to pull into and I was very visibly there, my break lights were on. She's now saying I was indicating right and reversed into her, when actually she started pulling in left to a place where there was no where to pull in because I was parked!

She had someone else in her car and I was alone

Even if I was indicating right (which I wasn't, but for arguments sake) I was not moving anywhere so why was she pulling into the left?

There is a minor bit of her paint on the back of my car, and I don't know what damage to hers, would this go down as my fault?

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello CW,

Did she actually say what she was doing when she ran into you? I presume that she was driving straight on. On the face of it logic would say that she is at fault. But look at it from her insurers point of view. If she says to them "I was driving along the road when this bloke parked at the side of the road reversed into me" it sounds plausible. The only other version is that for some reason she "drifted" towards the side of the road where you just happened to be parked. Even if you say "but I was parallel to the side of the rd. I was stationary" it still doesn't explain how the impact happened. The likely outcome is split liability on the grounds that you were reversing and may or may not have reversed into her but also that you should have looked and come to a stop when you saw her coming. The problem you have is that eventho you might have done nothing wrong it simply doesn't explain how the impact occured. But on the positive side the damage sounds very minor and if it is decided to go 50-50 it wouldn't be worth your while for either of you to claim. You'd both loose 2 NCB and pay higher premiums at rnl.

Katie 2 years ago

Hi , I skidded in heavy snow onto the other side of the road the road was clear of other cars coming down, I got stuck and a car came down the road and hit me head on at about 5 mph he is saying I'm at fault because I was on his side of the road, I had my hazard lights on and had been stuck on the road for 5 minutes there was no damage to my car. Who is to blame.

Reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hi Katie,

He is. You were "parked" and he should have seen you. (If you hit a bollard in the middle of the road for example you can't hold the bollard at fault can you?). All you have to do (if you want) is deny that there was any contact since there is no damage to your car so how can he prove that there was any contact for which you were to blame?

Katie 2 years ago

Hi thanks for the reply this has been going on since January 2013 and is in court this month he is claiming damages to him self whiplash and emotional distress aswell as his car apparently wrote off really stressed out the minute my insurance are great though.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Katie,

Glad to hear that your insurance are "great" they should be. That's what you pay them for and it shd be an easy one for them. Emotional distress?...Give me a break! Car written off? was it made of paper? As for whiplash. Only if (possibly) you are considered to be at fault...which you shn't be. If he'd had his eyes on the road and taken the driving conditions into account he wd never have hit you.

Jheeze Johnson 2 years ago

There was 1 lane which then turned into 2 lanes . The car in front ov me got into the left lane so i proceeded into the right hand lane , he then at last minute whith out giving me time to stop let alone space to do the manouver also whith no signal cut me up he didn't make it far as we crashed and i hit his back driver side corner of his car which altimatly span his car to the on comeing traffic faceing me ,,,, who is at fault??

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Jheeze Johnson,

He is. It was his actions that caused the accident. However don't be suprised if this ends up as a 50-50. The problem is you can't prove your version of events. and he can quite easily say that you actually ran into him. And the area of damage to your cars strengthens his case allowing him to claim that you were clearly behind him at the time and, therefore, it was your fault for not paying attention to traffic ahead of you. Your best chance is to point out that you were in the r/h/lane and if he was in the l/h/lane the accident can only have happened because he moved into your path. So you might have your work cut out to make sure your insurer see it like that too, but bear in mind the other drivers insurance company will have been a completely different voe which is why I think you should stel yourself for a split liability settlement of your claim

Jheeze johnson 2 years ago

I have a witness does this help? And also because he swerved and cut me up his vehicle was at 2o'clock , which first impact on my car is scratches to passenger side and then a slight v in my lower grille and bonnet from his wheel, will they take this into account ??? I'm also on RSA insurance with this being the 3rd crash the first was not my fault as police had to intervene the person tried leaving the country and the 2nd still in the process but seems it will be 50/50 ,, and now this 3rd .... Will they refuse my policy to insure me ????

Jheeze Johnson 2 years ago

Sorry to add again ,,, plus only damage to his car was driver side rear corner ,,,, if I was travelling behind him as u expect his insurers would say surely his damage would clearly be his whole back end not one corner ov it , and I would not have a v in the front ov my car ??? I'm so stressed as this is my independence and it's really getting me down

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again Jheeze,

No, I doubt if RSA will refuse to insure you...but your premiums could sky rocket which will amount to the same thing if you can't afford it. You witness needs to be independent (eg: unknown to you). You must make sure your insurer is familar with the road layout and precisely where the accident happened. You need to be able to show them where this all happened. But I have to warn you, he can just as easily say that you crashed into him as you can say he did it to you. There is nothing to stop him from saying that you refused to slow down when you saw him move into your lane. Alternatively he can just as easily claim he was in his own lane when you drifted into his lane and hit him. Your difficulty is in proving that he did cut you up and gave you no chance to avoid the collison. That is why pinpointing the location is so important for you. The area of damage merely shows there was contact it doesn't show who was at fault.

Jheeze Johnson 2 years ago

Thanks for you advice my insurer got up Google maps and talked through it all i can do now is Wait :/ my witness is independant( yess someone ive never seen before in my life or know of ) . I feel sick with worry :(

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again,

I know it's easy to say but don't feel sick about it. If you have a good indep witness that should make it easier for your insurer to convince the other side to accept that your version of events is the right one. Good luck

June 2 years ago

My friend were doing a right hand turn into a small road. Traffic was heavy and she has to cut 4 lanes to get across to the small road. While she was on the 3rd lane before the 4th lane in the yellow box an on coming car hit her front and the bumper came off. Please advise who is at fault.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

hello June,

Your friend is. She is making a turn that in effect put her into the direct path of an coming vehicle.

Samantha 2 years ago

Hiya everyone need help urgent.One afternoon I went to pick my son up from school.It was a side street I had entered the street.While the other driver was coming out. I must of been doing around 3 to 4 miles as its around school.He was trying to squeeze through.I stopped he hit into me.At the sceane of the accident he admitted libalty.He had five childrean at the back with out car seats and bealts and am sure hewas distracted on the phone.I felt sorry for as there was a a tin yscratch.When I said we should exchange insurance details he said theres no point and I said okay as I was my first ever accident I was going through shock he was offering me money to getaway from the sceane I said I dont want it.The matter was resolved know I have got a letter from the insuraance company hes claming injury what do I do?There is a witness who saw everything I am shocked why didnt I call the police at the sceane of the accident.Can anyone advise me please

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Samantha,

To answer your question - what do I do?

1) Is report the incident to your insurance company. Which you should have done at the time and I'm sure I don't need to tell you now why.

2) make sure your insurance company are aware of this witness and contect them asap.

Everyone claims injury these days so don't let that worry you. Your insurance will deal with it but only if they accept you were 100% at fault which isn't the case here. He should not have exited the side street unless the main street was clear which it wasn't as you were turning into "his" side street.

Your insurer needs to know a) was he moving at the time and had he actually exited the side street when the accident happened and

b) where is the damage to your car and his. (If the damage if to the front of your cars it will likely be 50-50. If the damage is to the front of his car but at the rear of yours then it will in all probability be his fault).

If the damage to both your cars is very minor it would make sense of neither of you to claim but obviously he thinks he is "injured". Time was when he could have got away with it but these days insurance companies work much harder to fight spurious injury claims like this.

Samantha 2 years ago

Hey thanks for that at time I was really shocked his car is hit from the front mine is rear front I was driving an audi a4 his was a ford focus I am to shocked as at the time he admitted liability..

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Samantha

Not sure what "rear front" means. But the crucial point for you is that if he was exiting the side street onto your road as you were turning into "his" street he is at fault. He should have seen you and stopped.

If the damage to your car is towards the rear and his at the front this would prove it (because it shows he turns into you). If the damage to your car and his is at the front then it will all likelihood be 50-50.

tigertes 2 years ago


Can anyone help me, had accident last year well if you call it that, reversing in car park not fast hit parked car spoke to the owner, he was ok about it no damage to his car or mine, but you are told to report to your insurance just in case other driver makes a claim, so told my insurance and was told by them I did the right thing and was told my premiums would increase just for now just in case the other driver makes a claim, but if other driver did not make a claim, I would be reimbursed the increase they had put on my premiums.

There was no claim made by the other driver, I made no claim, but when I phoned Insurance because I had heard nothing from them, and I got my renewal, not only have they increased my insurance they have decreased my no claims bonus by 6 points, and then when you question them about it, you get the same old thing about how, whoever told you that was misinformed, what they really mean is they lied.

What I would like to know is can they do this?

You like to try be honest but it does not do you any favours doing so.


reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello Tigertes,

What your insurance company should do (they shd have done this already) is get confirmation in writing from the other insurer that there will be no claim made against you. If the other insurer refuses then your insurer shd attempt to get in touch with their driver and get confirmation from him. If he refuses then your insurer should throw down the gauntlet and demand to inspect his car to see if there is any damage to his car and if alll else fails your insurer could simply tell you that they are going to assume no claim is pending and re-imburse you.

jasesaint 2 years ago

May I begin by commending you on great advice and support given, I wish I had found this many years ago.

My accident in question was 10 years ago but has caused great financial issues as my insurer declared my policy void from inception as I had not declared the vehicle was modified. The advisor they sent afterward advised me off the record not to sign a disclaimer and as I never attended court dates a 100 miles away and went travelling my legal settlement with insurer Zurich cost £26,000 plus and will be paid off in 4 months (£500/m installments!)

Anyway to the crash, I was travelling along and a vehicle ahead was parked within 5-10 metres of a pedestrian crossing. The car was left hand side kerb after picking up a friend. I approached at 40mph. Car indicated to perform a u-turn but I was already indicating to overtake and committed to manoeuvre. Car parked was opposite a giveway turning and intended to use the full throat of that junction to allow space to u-turn in one manoeuvre.

The car proceeded to turn so I tried to evade by using free carriageway to right, as car proceeded oblivious to my approach the vehicle was now across right hand lane. I couldn't stop and turned right into space of juntion to the right. I hit other car with my front left quarter into their rear drivers quarter.

I was made to be at fault and what's worse my voided policy was not refunded as they withheld the £900 premium until matter was settled. I only made an out of court agreement in 2010 to pay installments to Zurich once they put an injunction on my house as an asset they felt entitled to.

I appreciate your time for reading this and was I at fault for crash? Is it too late to contest a matter I did not take the time and effort to contest as a youth in court?

Can I claim premium held after being voided after such great time?

This nightmare has given me a deep distrust of insurers.

reinhard brck 2 years ago

Hello jasesaint,

Dear Oh dear you have had a rough ride and I'm sorry to say there is nothing I can say that will ease the pain.

1) all insurance will have a clause in the policy that they reserve the right to void your policy if any material facts come light that would affect the policy (or words to that effect). What this means (I'm sure you know it now if you didn't know it then) is that they voided your policy because you failed to tell them about the modifications which meant they weren't taking on the risk they thought they were and had they been made aware they would have declined to insure you. Also, insurance companies do not insure young drivers who have modified vehicles (especially it that modification increases the power of the car).

Your only option in appealing is to argue that a) you weren't aware that the car was modified b) the modifications didn't alter the specifications of the car and were purely superficial and c) the modifications played no role in the accident.

As to who was was at are because you (were forced) hit another car. Since they "caught the flak" so to speak they can't possibly be held at fault so their insurance can't be expected to pay out. However, that parked car that drove across your path is at fault (from a common sense point of view not an insurance companies defination of "fault") because their actions forced you to take evasive action that resulted in the crash. The only problem is, you can't prove that especially since there was no contact between you and them. But it has happened in very rare instances where an insurer accepts that their drivers actions led directly to an accident eventhough their driver wasn't hit themselves. But it means (in this case) the driver of the parked car comes forward and says to his insurance company "look, I did turn into the path of jasesaint." But this happened a long time ago so even getting any info out of that insurer with be very very hard.

Last stop...try the ombudsman service and let them act as a referee.

As a final thought, if they voided your policy did they void it "at inception" or only after the accident? If it was voided at inception (and its a bit legal here which is not my area of expertise) then you were, in effect driving uninsured and Zi wouldn't have been liable of any damage caused by the accident. The driver of the other car would have had to claim against you personally. If Zi settled the claim and then voided your policy you sould have had your premium back pro-rata and they could then claim the cost of the claim from you. But again get legal advice on that and my first stop would be to ring the Obudsman and they will look into it for you. I know I haven't been much help but I wish you luck. Just keep a clear head. be sure of your facts and stick to them.

jasesaint 2 years ago


Thanks for your advice, I will follow it the best I can.

Just to clarify, the crash was into the rear quarter of the vehicle that was was parked initially but then u-turned. There were only 2 vehicles around. Me and them, my insurers declined to support me further as the crash investigator/advisor they sent advised me not to sign the disclaimer 'off the record' although I have a witness.

I did appeal as you mention in B & C but vehicle was extensively modified and wheel size and sports suspension was modified.

This then escalated to the Magistrates Courts. So yes the letter the sent stated voided from inception although with premium withheld. Police did not get involved.

You have been a great help! Much appreciated for your prompt response sir!

reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hello again jasesaint,

So you have a witness. Are the indep and did they see what happened?

From your initial description I was under the impression that you were forced to avoid the car making a u-turn wh forced you to collide with a vehicle to your right. But your addition info suggests that the car parked at the side of the rd and wh made a u-turn ahead of you as you were about to over take it was the car you hit. If it can be shown that this car crossed your path then you have a strong case for claiming the accident as "non-fault" as it is their responsibility to make sure it is safe for them to carry out their manouevre. You had right of way. Your witness could be crucial to confirm this. You need to try and show that okay your car was modified and you didn't tell them and when they found out they were w/i their rights to do what they did. BUT nevertheless a) you were not at fault and b) the mods on your car played no role in the crash (eg: the accident did not happen because your car was modified). And what's this disclaimer you were asked not to sign?

jasesaint 2 years ago


Yes the parked vehicle started it's manoeuvre as I approached at full road speed.

It is good to know that accident was not my fault, the claim assessor found vehicle to be modified and Zi stated they would not have insured me if full disclosure given. He may of wanted to inspect impact areas as fault was contested but used Zi were happy to remove their risk. I am rueful that I didn't attend court and instead took the approach of an ostrich.

The witness was not of the accident but to the advisor stating that I should not sign disclaimer.

It was after they voided insurance policy, they sent out an advisor to the scene and we went through what happened. For Zi to fight case they wanted me sign disclaimer, as I didn't they didn't support any further.

I believe they then paid out to other party and pursued settlement from me through the Magistrates courts.

Many thanks for your time and help.

Johnk315 2 years ago

hi! , Everyone loves a persons writing quite definitely! promote many of us keep up a correspondence more info on your own document for Yahoo? I need a pro for this dwelling to unravel this dilemma. Could be that is definitely a person! Looking forward to search an individual. bgbcekgbccfe

jade 2 years ago

Hi. Yesterday i was backing out of my drive which is behind house on private road. It is a 5mph road. I looked both way before gettimg in car. As it is a long path anyone going the right speed would have been seen at the end. Constantly looking behind me as its a very narrow road with drives and garages all around. Vision was obscured by fences so was going slow. Path was clear so i kept going and out of no where a car came past and i hit the rear wheel arch. As it clearly says everywhere 5mph she was obviously going at least thirty due to stopping speed amd just appearring. Only a slight dent but she blaiming me. Said she was going 5mph but if she had she would have been directly behind me as i was backing so would have seen her. Also she would have alot of time to stop after seeing me starting to reverse. And if she was and still hit she would have stopped behind me not at least 15ft down the path. So who is to fault? As im still on my drive when it happened and she going 25 over limit down a possibly private road which is very narrow full of drives and garages.

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hello Jade,

Sorry but you are at fault here 100%. You were reversing and as such it's your responsibility to make sure you do it safely and don't put other road users at risk. It makes no difference what the other driver was doing or not doing it makes no difference if your line of vision was obscured if they were going "too fast" or even travelling the wrong way down a one way will be held at fault because it was you that was reversing. Sorry but it's clear cut and I'm sure both your and her insurance company will agree on that

Truthfaith 2 years ago

Email legal advise:

Tuesday 9/16/2014 @ approximately 9:45 am. Boston, MA. There was Grid lock traffic coming off exit 18 (mass pike east). I was near the end of off ramp approximately a football field and a half length away from the intersection of Cambridge St. & Soldiers way. The exit ramp was a 2 lane road ramp traveling in the same direction (one way off ramp exit) where the accident occurred. My vehicle was stopped with the rest of traffic, I was not moving when the impact happened. I was in the left lane with a line of cars in front of me and a car to my right with a line of cars in front of it. We were stopped for at least 5 minutes waiting for the light to change and traffic to move when out of no where my son and I were jolted forward in our seats & there was a horrible loud crashing / crunching sound. My son screamed, I didn't know what just happened until I looked behind us and there was a large white Bernie and Phylls truck crushed into / actually stuck into the rear drivers side of my minivan. We were butted against each other. His front passengers side butted/torn into my rear drivers side bumper and panel. I got out of they minivan to take a look at what happened. The driver of the truck got out and was apologizing and asking if there was anything we could do to resolve without getting police or insurance involved he feared loosing his job. I was shocked and worried for the safety of my son so I dialed 911. I told them where we were & they asked about injuries I said I was worried my son was just diagnosed with autoimmune diabetes and addrenaline spikes his blood sugars. They told me someone would be right there. We were in the middle of an off ramp with hundreds of cars trying to pass. After 10 minutes I knew we had to move or the likely hood of another accident was very high. About a football field away I spotted a parking lot off the ramp on the right. It said "do not enter" but it was the closest safest place for us to be. Both vehicles moved to the parking lot. That was when I realized he had 2 passengers not 1. They got out & started spraying & trying to wipe away the scraps scratches divets with what looked like glass plus & paper towels. The driver kept repeating he was going to get fired and the passengers kept saying they would put a new bumper on and fix my car for free. I checked my do a sugars (at this time he was trembling) they read HI (over 500) I called Joslin diabetes (which is where we were headed) they insisted I get him there asap to avoid keratosis episode/damage. It was now 20 or more minutes from when I dialed 911 & no siren sounds or lights anywhere. I suggested we switch Info (I took down his license plate). He gave me his name & number but didn't care for mine. I insisted he take my info and requested insurance / registration info from him. He only wrote down my name & number. At this point I really never considered that he would straight out lie & I was worried for my so I wanted to get him to the drs. I did take pics of the visible damage which was a torn up rear drivers side bumper, dents scratches scrapes & divets on the rear drivers side panel up past my rear wheel. What kills me is that I didn't get pics of our cars butted positions or witness (1) out of fear of getting rammed by the on coming traffic (2) state police were on their way (3) it was so clearly the trucks fault I wasn't moving (like the 100s of other cars in traffic with us). After seeing my sons diabetes dr I had to get right home to get my other kids off the bus. It's About a 20 min ride. Half way home I felt pulling and shaking once @ home I realized my tire was Loosing Air. My that evening completely flat. My husband didn't want me driving for fear of damage to the tire rods etc. I put a claim in w/my insurance company & once they saw the damage waived my deductible. Unfortunately due to our financial situation we didn't have rental on our insurance policy & couldn't afford a rental we have 4 children and 2 were recently diagnosed with autoimmune disorders, chronic Lyme which way misdiagnosed, & toxin mold exposure from our home (which I am currently dealing with also). Liberty advised me to put a claim in with the other drivers insurance for rental seeing that he was clearly at fault. (It took a lot of research by me to find the actual insurance company (it's a leases commercial truck with 3rd part insurance). Finally figured it was hanover & I put my claim in. They said the would investigate & get back to me. I had to borrow money to obtain a vehicle. I have children with serious medical needs. Surgery & dr apts scheduled. I called both insurance companies every day to expedite the process I couldn't afford a rental. Hanover was very rude & difficult. They couldn't get a statement from their driver. I called the number he gave me which I have Hanover (not a working #) I was furious with Hanover I called and asked what the deal was (they said we are waiting for his statement, what # r they calling the one I have them I explained that it was a fake #. They said claims take awhile & they have 30 days and absolutely will NOT authorize my rental. Borrowed more money. Called a number on the insurance card the driver gave me. They were shocked at hangovers laziness and tracked him down and got his number. 3 weeks after accident he gives a statement and LIES! I've headed a coho me different things from his insurance company (he was in left lane and I cut in front of him while we were both moving) (I went right into his lane and his him while we were both moving) & now because I showed them picks of damage & auto shop showed me damage proves damage came from behind supporting my version (true version) of what happened. So today it was the other driver wasn't mixing and I pulled right into him? I'm so angry how to make the truth prevail? I won't give up till I do.

Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

Hi Truthfaith,

The area of the damage to your car in this case ought to prove your point. I live and work in the UK so I don't know how car insurance works in the USA but I assume it's similar. The only way he could show that you were at fault is if the area of damage to your and his vehicle supports his version of events. If you moved into his L/H/lane and hit him then there will be scrapes and scratches to the front left of your car and to the front right of his. I'm not surprised the unsurance comapny are being so cagey...people like the driver behind you are always tempted to massage the truth. But the best he can hope for his a 50-50 split claim (wh wont help him much if he is worried about his job).

Bernie 2 years ago

Hi Reinhard,

I was driving forward and to the left out of my parking lot after which a waiting stationary car at the right of the lot tried to reverse into the parking lot and hit my rear with his side. His reverse turning was totally off and speedy, otherwise he could have entered the lot after I exited to the left. I did have a video cam of what happened showing I left first while he was stationary as well as the reversing collision. Was he totally at fault since reversing has no right of way?

reinhard beck 2 years ago

Hello Bernie,

If he reversed into you then he is at fault.

numberonebarber profile image

numberonebarber 23 months ago from London, United Kingdom

hi thanks for the great article.

i ride a motorbike and was aproaching a road on my left and there was a van slightly out in the bus lane wanting to turn right. As i got nearer i looked at driver and he was looking to his left and then as i was passing a car flashed him out and he hit me in the side and tipped me over. he gave details and left quick i then told the police who arrived after and my insurance what had happened and took a photo of a puddle of coolant where he hit me trailing to where i pushed the bike.

3 months later he says im to blame for these created reasons.

in his world there was a lorry in my lane that let him out halfway.

i overtook said lorry and hit him whilst he was staionary

i was going too fast

i made no attmept to brake

i was not looking where i was going

he has no details of any lorry. he has no damage to the side of his van where i would have hit going in his eyes about 30mph with total weight of about 30stone. my bike was broke on the left where he hit and on the right where i met the ground with grace.

What impresses me most is a lorry would take up my side fully i would have to filter on the wrong side of the road into oncoming traffic whilst not looking where i was going and managing to not see the front of a white van ahead of said lorry.

i have been told it could go 50/50 seriously???

if it does go to court will my defence raise the question how i could filter into oncoming traffic and not see a stationary van.

also the picture shows i landed where i was hit so was going 10-15mph

he was stationary

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hello numberonebarber,

If I've understood you right the car that hit you was coming out of a side street. If that is the case then he is at fault. It doesn't matter if you were going too fast etc have right of way. If it can be proven that you were overtaking a vehicle ahead of you and that therefore he hit you because "you came out of nowhere" so to speak then yes, you would be partially to blame but the split would be more like 20/80 in your favour. (But this lorry flashed him out. And the driver that hit you acted on that without checking that it was safe for him to do so - that puts him at fault).There is no damage to the side of this car that allegedly you ran into but there must be damage to the front of his vehicle. An insurance company can only act on what they are told. He is telling his insurer one story and are telling yours another. However the main issue is: can it be established that he hit you as he exited the side street? Your insurer should ask to see the statement given to the police.

numberonebarber 23 months ago

thanks. I presume there is damage to the front of his bumper. he admits he was half across the Rd but is saying I somehow hit him. he has no details of a lorry he says I overtook I have no front end damage so would have had to swerve in to hit him. the front of his as I passed. he didn't give a statement to the police he left straight after giving me his details about two minutes after the crash. thank you for replying it was appreciated

numberonebarber 23 months ago

it wasnt the lorry he created that flashed him it was a car coming the other way. he admits he was on the road admits a car on his left flashed him (therefore clearly looing left) but says i was filtering into head on traffic and hit him stationary whilst he was across the front of the lorry despite that meaning he would be visible to me

what i say happened was he was flashed and pulled out hitting me causing side damage. i would hope a judge would see common sense and find him at fault but you never know

reinhard beck 23 months ago

hello again numberonebarber,

If he moved out into the rd (for whatever reason) and you hit hit he is at fault regardless of what you were doing. You had the right of way remember. Whether or not you were overtaking a lorry is a mute point. Even if it can be established that you were overtaking it as he pulled out the bulk of the fault would still lie with him.

I don't understand why this is going to court. Either your insurer backs your version or accepts the other driver version.

louise 23 months ago

Hi i was in the middle of a 3 point turn ther was no cars on ether side of the road and a taxi driver come down on the right hand side of the road and hit the drivers side of my car who's at fault

Lee 23 months ago

Hi I was driving down a road when a lorry in front was turning right there was room for me to pass safely on the left unaware to me he flashed someone out of the junction who hit me when I passed the lorry they were coming straight over the road out wondering if you think it's there fault they are saying cos they couldn't see me it's not there fault

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hi Lee,

He is at fault. His arguement is that he didn't see you...he should have thought of that before exiting his road. Suppose you'd been a cyclist what would he say then? Just because someone "flashes" you it doesn't mean you can/shd act on it. It's not a rule of the road that you will see in The Highway Code.

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hi Lee,

He is at fault. His arguement is that he didn't see you...he should have thought of that before exiting his road. Suppose you'd been a cyclist what would he say then? Just because someone "flashes" you it doesn't mean you can/shd act on it. It's not a rule of the road that you will see in The Highway Code.

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hi Louise,

Usually in these cases you would be. simply because you were turning across lanes and (potentially) against oncoming traffic and it is not their responisbility to avoid you. It is up to you to make sure you avoid them. The only exception might be if yu can demonstrate that you were stationary and were "parked" but its a very slim chance because as you were in the car & behind the wheel you would be considered as therefore "driving" and in control of he vehicle. All the other driver has to do is say they were driving along normally when you hit them as you carried out your manouvre and drove into them.

Kevg 23 months ago

Hi I was involved in an RTA where a van driver decided to overtake stationary traffic to jump to an upcoming lane that filtered at traffic lights. I was pulling out of a minor road as traffic had come to a standstill, and stopped halfway to ensure no traffic was coming in the direction I wanted to go (right) traffic was clear but as I edged out the van appeared and hit the front of my car mainly taking off the number plate and scraping the bumper, his insurance company is blaming me, but he was on the wrong side of the road and admitted he drove that journey every day so knew there was a junction. Surely the Highway Code which says must not overtake near a junction puts him 100% at fault here??

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hello Kevg

Sorry Kevg but if you had rung me with this scenario I'd be putting you at fault too. Simple reason, you were exiting a side street. You thought it was ok but it wasn't. In other words if you'd stayed where you were until you were 100% sure it was ok (because you had a clear view of what was going on ahead of you) then this accident wouldn't have happened. I know what you mean about the other driver but the accident happened because you pulled out (& then stopped!) and not because of what he was doing.

Kevg 23 months ago

Hi thanks for the response, I had to stop due to oncoming traffic in the other direction, if I had pulled out without checking that first then I agree I would have been 100% at fault. I have a witness that confirms my version of events, he was being hasty and jumping stationary traffic not parked vehicles, knowing full well there was a hazard up ahead. The Highway Code states DO NOT overtake at a junction, what's the point of having a code if in the eyes of the law it means nothing?

louise 23 months ago

Hi thanks for getting back to me dosnt it matter that he was on the wrong side of the road and i have a independent witness to back that up and i am only tpft i have gone through his insurance and they have give me a courtesy car on a without prejudice basis and sent a enginer to see my car and declared it a right off now there telling my solicitors to give them 30 days to investigate and they can't get in contact with there policy holder do you have any advice what i should do from here would be appreciated thank

louise 23 months ago

Were has my post gone ?

Lee 23 months ago

Thanks for your reply that is what a lot of people have said to me and that for two reasons it's her fault for coming on my road from a minor and then coming out on a flash but can you clarify that I'm well with in my rights to pass any vehicle who is turning right as long as there is room to do so by going past him on the left I've seen police vehicles do it since but I supose it's just peace of mind to hear it from someone who has knowlage about these things like yourself thank you again for your last reply

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hi Louise,

I have no idea what's happened to your post. But you were in the middle of doing a 3 point turn I think when you had this accident.

I know that the other driver haven't reached a decision on liability but from my own experience you would be held to be at fault. Because if you are doing a 3 point turn then you are potentially manouevring your vehicle into the path of oncoming vehicles (whether or not they are on the "wrong side" of the rd). But having said all that if you have a decent indep witness you can prove that it wasn't your fault then that's great (and lucky) for you.

reinhard beck 23 months ago

Hi Kevg,

Remember an insurance company can only decide liability on what it can prove (so whatever it might say in the H/W/Code an insurance company might not be able to prove a driver broke the rules) Also bear in mind insurance is not concerned (ultimately) with who is right and wrong. Your insurance covers you (regardless of who is at fault) if your car is damaged in an accident or vandalism etc. In this case the best case scenario is 20/80 split liabilty against you. (As I understand it you were hit by a vehicle overtaking another vehicle stationary to your right. If that is the case, that would be your best outcome in my view.

Colin 22 months ago

Hello there Reinhard. Thank you for such a useful page.

I had a very minor accident the other day and needed some advice. I was driving down the road at a slow steady speed, it was a residential road with cars parked on both sides. As I drove on I noticed a car parked in the middle of the road in front of me. It was facing me on my side of the road, therefore on the wrong side in front of incoming traffic. The car's lights were off too although the occupants were inside. I gestured to the driver to move so I could go past. He simply waved me on and told me to go around him through the gap on the opposite side of the road. As I tried to squeeze through the gap between his illegally parked car and the legally parked car on my right, I ended up scratching the passenger side of his car. I was in a hurry and as we live nearby each other, we just exchanged phone numbers with the promise that we would sort it out later privately.

Who would you say is at fault for the scratch? I realise it was a stationary vehicle and I should have judged the gap more accurately but people who park illegally like that infuriate me and unfortunately this happens all too often on the road we were on. Sometimes people even park like this and leave there vehicle there unattended for hours.

Thank you in advance

reinhard beck 22 months ago

Hello Colin

I'm sorry to say you are and you already know why. There is an expression used in insurance in cases like this which is: "he was there to be seen". You could see he was there (illegally or not) you assessed the risk and made you decision. The accident happened not because he was parked illegally but because although "he was there to be seen" you took a chance that didn't come off. Give you another example that I've come across many reverse out of a parking space and hit a vehicle parked illegally on the other side of the rd. You are at fault. Again because "he was there to be seen". If you leave your parking space at the road side & hit a car coming down the wrong way in a one way street you are at fault. again "because he was there to be seen".

Lee 22 months ago

Hi I spoke to you a couple of weeks ago about going past the lorry and a car Was flashed out and hit me well I have had a phone all saying they are blaming me saying I mounted the kerb to get past I have a witness who says I didnt I know I didn't they have come out with this out the blue wondering what can you see happening I would appreciate if you could message me back thanks obviously I'm going to keep saying that never happened and I passed safely just wondering if this is the type of thing insurances try to do thanks

reinhard beck 22 months ago

Hello again Lee,

That witness should help. The fact remains it is the car exiting the side street who has the responsibility of making sure it is safe for him to do that. (just because another driver "flashes" you doesn't mean its safe. That driver can't see what's happening behind them. Would the lorry have "flashed" that other driver if he had known you were about to pass him on his left? Of-course not!) Mounting the curb doesn't prove you were guilty of anything either. Stick to your guns and simply point out that the other car exited the side street when he shouldn't have done. That's what caused the accident and not anything you might or might not have done. But your witness should end all points of dispute.

Lee 22 months ago

Thankyou so much for your reply that is what I think to i will let you know the outcome of it I can't see my insurance not fighting my case to be honest thanks again

reinhard beck 22 months ago

Hello Lee,

Good Luck.

Leanne 21 months ago

Hi there, my mum was parking in a space which was tight because of a car parked illegally on double yellow lines. She doesn't believe she hit the car but a man appeared up against her window demanding £90 for damage to his car. He blocked her door not allowing her to get out and view the said damage. She felt very intimidated (she has bi-polar and although it is now medicated she struggles with confidence issues). She managed to get out of the car and they both found there to be no damage. The man insisted that he go and clean the car as it was very dirty and that any damage could not be seen (surely any damage would be visible as a collision would have taken the dirt off right!?) My mum allowed him to leave and come back. Surprise surprise he came back with a small scratched area. Again demanding £90 my mum said she would like a second opinion from her usual garage and he said he had his own garage that would confirm it. She gave him her name, number and address (as she felt intimidated into surrendering this information). The man has since called her and turned up at her house demanding money. She now feels afraid in her own home. Any advice please.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 21 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Leanne,

Well, my first thought was...she should call the police. My next thought was she should tell in no uncertain terms to ****! (but I understand if she doesn't) but I would still call the police. An accident is a civil matter so the police don't get involved but demanding money with menacies is. Other than that she should report the incident to her insurer (for information purposes only) just in case he contacts them and starts making all sort of allegations. She is under no obligation to pay him anything and if he threatens her with the police then call his bluff. All they will do is say "let your insurance sort it out". (Or she could tell him he caused some damage to her car and she wants £500 from him!). It just might shut him up

Leanne 21 months ago

Thank you for the reply. We called the police on 101 for some advice and they said to go through the insurance and to not hesitate to call 999 if she felt threatened by him again. He visited her home and my Grandad went round to witness it. He showed my grandad the damage but would not allow my grandad to take a photograph. Nor would he line his car up with my mums to see what part would have hit... as my Grandad said the damage he pointed out was 2 tiny dots of paint missing just under the cars registration plate. No damage could be seen on the bumper or anywhere else on the back of the car. My mum told him she would not pay him any cash and after some raised voices and the police being called he abandoned the scene. The police later came and took a statement from my mum and said they would visit the man to tell him to go through the insurnace and not bother her again. So far there has been no more contact from him ☺yey. He has however put in a claim against her. Do you think she will be found to be at fault? As she was reversing i can only see that they would find it to be either 1) a full fault claim against her or 2) a fraudulent claim made by him. He had a friend come out to look at the car with at the time of the incident. And the friend had said he saw no damage (until he washed it) but the friend was not there when my mum was shown the damage later in the day. I am aware that the witness could easily change this fact to side with his friend.

Thank you

Truthfaith 21 months ago

So in my case mentioned above I was not found at fault and my insurance company took care of all the damage to my vehicle but I was stuck getting a rental which in the end was $2000. I was told that the other drivers insurance would reimburse me for the costs seeing that his negligent driving caused me to have no vehicle. The insurance companies dragged out the total loss process and I was without a vehicle for a long time. Which is why the rental costs is so high. Now his his insurance company has denied my claim for reimbursement saying that I failed to meet the burden of proof. I Am at my wits end with this. It was def 100% the other drivers fault. I was sitting stationary for over 5 mins when the truck tried to pass me on my left when the road was not big enough and he hit me. He misjudged his size and space and had ok patience if he would have waited along with me and the other 100s of cars trying to get off the exit this never would have Happened. I cannot understand how they can deny me reimbursement. I'm not sure what to so but I cannot allow this injustice to happen. Do I get a lawyer and take them to court?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 21 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Truthfaith,

Your insurance company should be dealing with this...not you. If the other side admitted liability they are responsible for all the costs so what they shd have done is A) settle as quick as possible and B) provide you with a hire car. The only way they can dispute the cost of the hire car is if you "splashed out" on a car of higher spec than your own. In other words if you normally drive a 1.6 ( lets say) and you hire a 2.o litre car. It sounds to me like they might have admitted liability and then changed their mind. The only other possibility is that repairs to your car took longer than they think it should have and are not prepared to pay for any delays. Again your insurer shd tell you what is going on. And what your insurer should have done is sorted out a hire car for you. Why didn't they? But the bottom line is...if the lorry drivers insurance have admitted liability to your insurer then they are liable for the cost of that hire. So you need to find out; was the settlement of you total loss claim "dragged out" and if so who by and why? What the TP cd and shd have done is say (for example) ok we know we cd be at fault here but it might take time to sort out but we'll accept "liability w.o prejudice" and agree to pay for hire for X days and then we'll see. Or at the very least your insurer cd have negotiated something like that for you. Insurance companies have "arrangements" to agree certain precedures to keep costs down...esp the cost of hire (they have commerical arrangements with hire companies that mean they get much lower rates than you will get them for. So find out if your claim was delayed, who by and why.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 21 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hello Leanne,

The other guy have to prove that your mum hit his car. The witness doesn't count because he's not independent. Your insurance company shd send an engineer round to check on the damage and confirm; if there is damage, whether you caused it (eg is the area of damage consistant with what he says your mum did and is the damage fresh?) and how much will it cost to fix. But admit nothing. If he is going to make a mountain out of a mole hill then let him do all the spade work.

Joy Kirkbride 20 months ago


seems a straight forward answer to me, but I'd just like some advice.

I was travelling down a 30mph street, cars parked either side making it only 1 lane. I got so far down the street & got along side a large 4x4 and the man parked behind yanked his car out, no indicators, or slowly, straight out. I emergency stopped my car but it was too late. He didn't seem to brake at all & hit me. He admitted he couldn't see what was coming due to the large 4x4 & the fact that the drivers side of his car was next to the pavement. He got out very aggressively, shouting I was speeding, I wasn't. And my passenger can vouch for all this too.

He said it is my fault as I was apparently speeding, yet admitted he could not see! I'm expecting my insurance will never accept 50/50 or anything other than he is at fault?

reinhard beck 20 months ago

Hi Joy,

You're right. It is straight forward. If he was parked at the side of the rd and moved off into the road & hit you then he is at fault. And makes no difference what you were doing. (even if you were "speeding" why then didn't he wait for you to "speed" past before moving into traffic?) Useful rule of thumb one: if you are on a main road & some one hits you they are at fault. rule of thumb two: if you are trying to carry out a manoeuvre (eg a turn) & hit someone it's you fault.

JoyKirkbride 20 months ago

Perfect reply =) Knew there's no way he could be right. My insurance say same. Just worry seen as my car is a lot more expensive than his & he was so aggressive ! Caused around £1500 to mine... Thanks for you help.

Stephen Heffernan 19 months ago

Hi, I was driving on a road with two lanes - left lane for left turn and going straight and right lane for right turn. I was driving in the right hand lane past cars and clipped the wing mirror of a car stopped in the left hand lane as she was too far over into my lane and I couldn't move out any further as there was oncoming traffic.

Am I at fault or is she?

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 19 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hi Stephen,

Well, if you were still completely in your lane then she will be at fault...if it can be proven that she strayed into your lane (even by a fraction). But can anyone prove anything here? I can see this being settled as a disputed claim by your respective insurance companies. My advice would be for both of you to not bother claiming. the damage is very minor (I'm assuming) and the cost of claiming would be far higher due to loss of NB and increased premiums at renewal than the cost of any repairs.

Emma 18 months ago

Hi just a general query. Do you recommend motor legal Protection. It is £30


reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 18 months ago from LEEDS Author

hi emma,

That's a question I haven't anticipated! Still, motor legal protection I don't think is really necessary these days. What used to be the case (in the olden days) is that if you were involved in an accident you needed to claim back your "uninsured losses" such as your excess you might have paid, use of a hire car, loss of earnings and personal injury. But these days (to save time and money) an insurer will deal inhouse with all of these. ie; if your accident is clearly non fault your excess will be waived automatically and the 3rd party insurer will arrange a hire car for you and if you are injured they will deal with that for you too and compensate you for loss of earnings and so on. In the old days all these "uninsured losses" had to be claimed back through a solicitor- a lengthy and costly prosesses. So it's only any use to you if you are involved in an accident where you need to claim back money not covered by your policy.

Confused 18 months ago

I have an unusual one. I had to turn right at a set of lights onto a two lane road. I turned, and finding my way blocked in one lane, moved to the other. This lane was also obstructed a little further on so I stopped, indicated that I was going to go to back to the other lane (which was now clear) and waited.

Presumably thinking that I was going to come out in front of him, a driver in the other lane slowed to a stop, and the van behind him failed to stop and went in to the back of him . Nobody had hit my car, which had not had contact with any vehicle.

Hearing the bang, and realising there had been an accident, I pulled over and got out of my car to make sure nobody was hurt. To my shock, the van driver who had run into the car in front suggested that the accident was my fault due to my road positioning, and the guy he had hit seemed to agree with him. The car driver said I was moving towards him (which I'm pretty sure I wasn't when trying to piece together events) which is why he stopped , causing the van driver to go into the back of him .Neither of them are claiming that my car made contact with any other vehicle. The fact that I had stopped means that they took my registration details.

In light of this surprising conversation, I contacted my insurer, who said that I could not be held responsible for the accident as it was a straightforward case of the van driver not leaving sufficient braking distance to stop. They also said that as I was not "involved" in the accident in the context of hitting or being hit by another vehicle, there was no need for me to make a formal report.

The whole experience has left me a bit shocked and shaken. Is there anything else I need to do here / be concerned about, or am I worrying needlessly ?

reinhard beck 17 months ago

Hi Confused (and sorry for the delay)

Your insurer is right and yes you are worrying needlessly.

Roxanna79 17 months ago


I think you will agree with the insurer here but still going to ask anyway.

Daughter was exiting a car park turning right onto a main road across two oncoming lanes(no left turn). There was a yellow hatched box and her exit was clear, the car in the first oncoming lane had stopped to let her out and the second oncoming lane was clear, she edged out. A car then appeared on the second oncoming lane, my daughter stopped and the oncoming car hit her driver side corner. Insurer's saying that it is her fault.

I understand that the car on the main road always has right of way, but equally she had the right to enter the hatched box and stopped appropriately when she saw the oncoming vehicle. Surely even on a main road a driver has to drive with care and attention. If a child had run out onto the road there, then the oncoming car would have been liable. It appears ridiculous that a yellow hatched box is there to assist drivers exiting car park yet when she used it correctly she is at fault.

Feeling frustrated!!

reinhard beck 17 months ago


Yes I know! How many times have I had these (endless) conversations with policyholders who feel that they obeyed the Highway Code to the letter and drove carefully and responsibly and yet...!!!

But let's consider this problem in the abstract. Two cars crash what rules do you apply as an insurer to reach a decision? (If you leave it up to the drivers to make that decision no decision would ever be reached. So the decision has t be taken out of your hands. Rules are drawn up which say...if you exit a car park or a side street onto a main road and there is an accident you are at fault because the car on the main rd has priority. That is the rule. And there are no exceptions. If there were every claim would be contested lawyers would get involved it would take years and years and cost an absolute fortune. So I do understand how you feel but your insurer (and the other drivers insurer as well don't forget) will insist the rules are obeyed. Sorry

lisee 17 months ago

Overtaking a cyclist in a hgv and a car pulls out behind me. scraped all down the side of his car and lost his mirror against my mudflaps. He's saying I pulled out when he was over taking me, but i indicated and pulled out overtaking the cyclist and he must have be close to see, and didn't realise that my cab pulls out before my trailor, hence him hitting my mudflaps. Who's fault is it actually

reinhard beck 17 months ago

Hi lisee

I could be wrong here, but I think it will a split claim 20-80% in your favour. You did pull out to overtake & should have made sure it was ok for you to do so. The car is more at fault though because he was behind you and he shd have been more aware of what was going on ahead of him. If you over take you do so at your own risk and if it doesn't pay's your fault.

Roxanna79 17 months ago

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I had always been under the impression that if someone hit you then they were at fault and in answer to your question re what rules you should apply my response would be to look at the positioning damage on any car as evidence. Live and learn. It is actually a scary thought though that whenever you pull onto a main road if you get hit, it's your fault regardless.

reinhard Beck 17 months ago

Hi Roxanna79,

Don't forget all (as far is I know) of these rules have been tested in court over many years. Also bear in mind your policy protects you from any one making a claim against you whether it's because you damaged their property or caused them will be covered. But when you take the car off the driveway onto the street you do so at your own risk. Which means your insurer does not judge you or even take your side (wh a policyholder always expects) and as a claims advisor people just couldn't understand when I told them they were at fault for exiting a side street and hitting some one on a main rd. They always wanted me (the insurance company) to fight & take the matter to court because that was my job. But it wasnt. My job was to call a spade a spade. At which point people started screaming at me.

Roxanna79 17 months ago

That isn't nice for people to scream at you, I think they have lost the plot if they do that but I do understand the frustration when their vehicle has been hit and they are classed as being at fault. Daughter wasn't hurt and that is the main thing, thanks againfor clarifying

Riki- 17 months ago

Hi, I was on the right land and overtook a driver on the left lane... I indicated and checked my mirrors. When it was safe to do so I overtook, unfortunately when doing this manoeuvre the driver on the left land drove up fast and collided with the rear left side of my vehicle. The front drivers side of his car bore superficial scratches. Who is at fault

reinhard beck 17 months ago

Hi Riki,

I'm not sure what you mean when you say..."the driver on the left land drove up fast". It sounds like you had passed him and for some reason put his foot on the gas. The area of damage on your cars suggests you were still on the r/h/lane & he still in his l/h/lane. If that is the case he would be at fault for running into the back of you. However, there is nothing to stop him saying you drifted into his lane or than when you overtook him you drived in front of him (or tried to) in his lane cutting out his braking distance; hence the accident. I reckon you might have to bit your lip and accept a split liability outcome. You'll only get a 100% decision in your favour if the circs are 100% clear. And I don't think they are.

amelamustafic 16 months ago

Hi, from Australia, I was travelling on the main road and I went to turn left into the smaller two way road and also there is a small road on the left as soon as you turn left.I slowed as I was turning and I checked if it was safe and accelerated driving straight and just as I was about to completely pass the small road on my left, a car hit directly into my left front wheel damaging my left side bumper and my headlight popped out slightly ,my bumper bar has his red paint all over and his damage was on his right front bumper bar. He was telling me it was my fault because I didn't stop but I think he needed to give way to me as I was driving on the road. He was the one who didn't stop at all or slow down yet he wanted to exit the road as it was ending. I am also not sure if the small road on the left is side street I can give you address and you can see on Google map if possible. Thank you in advance. The address is Brisbane Road 148 Gold Coast and I turned in Jacobs drive and he was coming from the street on the left side (no name street).Also I don't have comprehensive insurance only third part. Can you please tell me who is at fault here.He was going around to potential witnesses and trying to convince them that it was my fault. Thanks for your consideration.

reinhard beck 16 months ago

Hi amelamustafic,

First of all don't be intimidated by the other driver getting witnesses. what. If he is at fault the witnesses will simply confirm that when they describe what they saw. Now are you at fault? To cut a long story short if you were on a main road, if he was exiting a street where he was required to give way then he is at fault. If that is how it turns out the fact that you don't have comp policy wont matter as his insurance will pay for the repairs to your car. (in an accident that is your fault TPF&T wont cover the repairs to your car but your insurer will pay for his). By the way I couldn't find Jacobs Dr on G/maps.

amelamustafic 16 months ago

Thank you. I will have to write a letter to his insurance now and explain how it happened. If you can try again for address it is 1 Jacob Drive Labrador or 148 Brisbane Road because this is crucial part I turned left from Brisbane Road into Jacob drive and he was coming from the street on my left side I just hope this is side street because there are a lot of shops there even this street doesn't have a name and ends there where he hit me .I hope because I was coming from his right side he need to give way for me. Thank you

reinhard beck 16 months ago

Hello again, amelamustafic,

looks like you both were on a minor road. So who had right of way?

You would if only because you were travelling straight on and the other driver was attempting to access that road (and should make sure the road is clear for him to do that). It can be tricky establishing liability that happen on side streets because there are no rules about who has priority but I don't think this applies here

amelamustafic 16 months ago

Thank you for your help and time, I really do hope that I did have right of way and the other driver is wrong in this situation.

chris 15 months ago

Hello from the uk

I was driving along a major road and indicated to turn into a side road I saw the road ahead was clear and safe to turn in about halfway across a driver from the sideroad pulled out and hit my rear quarter panel and wheel surely they are at fault because I have right of way and have done everything possible to ensure a safe manoveur

Reinhard beck 15 months ago

Hi Chris,

He's at fault. He was exiting a side street when he shouldn't have done.

Chris 15 months ago

Hello again currently my insurance company says that because we were both performing a maneuver the liability will be 50/50 split becuase we both have a duty of care to watch out for each other, I now have a witness who can verify the accident and that I had begun turning when about halfway through the turn the other driver comes out of the side road and hits me surely then this would put it at his liability like you said for pulling out when he clearly shouldn't have

reinhard Beck 15 months ago

Hello again Chris,

I think your insurance company is wrong here. The driver exiting the side street needs to check that it is safe for him to enter the main rd. it wasn' the accident proved. He hit you on the rear wheel. To me that shows you were well into your maneouvre when he hit you. This accident scenario can never be 50/50. You have right of way. He hit you because he moved off into the main rd to early.

eatalot 15 months ago

Hi, If you can help clarify whether the case is as clear cut as I presume. Travelling on the left lane of a duel carriageway with many side streets joining, I came past a set of lights on green, so I proceeded on, on my right came a car cutting across the carriageway to side street on the left.

Due to seeing them late, I went into their passenger side and front wheel. Upon reflection and visiting the area afterwards, the street they exited from also has a set of lights, but were only permitted to join the carriageway by turning left (not cut across the carriageway). Following your previous notes, they were entering the main road and did not observe the highway code and hopefully you will agree that they are at fault.

Insurers have just notified me that TP have employed private solicitors to prepare a counter claim. Is there anything I should be aware of and maybe prepare for, as I cannot think what they might be able to defend and claim on?

reinhard beck 15 months ago

Hello eatalot,

I'm a bit confused. Your 1st para suggests that a car on your right turned in front of you as it made to enter a side str to your left. But in 2nd para you say they exited a side street. (to hit his passanger side they would have to be exiting a side str from your right wdn't they?) But in meantime, if you are on a main road & if you are driving straight ahead you are not at fault. Whether were trying to enter a side str on your left or exiting a side street to your right the fact is they crossed into your path. You need to find out from your insurer why TP are hiring a solicitor. People do this because they think a) you'll be intimidated (oh mt gawd!...he's got Rumpole of the Old Bailey!) and b) because they think a sols has more clout. But in my experience they very often have no clue about motor claims or how an insurance company operates. Facts are facts and wont change just because you've got a "brief" writing snotty letters.

eatalot 15 months ago

Thanks for responding, apologies, it is quite hard to explain, for simplicity, maybe we should picture the layout as a crossroad, they came into my view from a side street on my right looking to exit their continuation on my left, I was on the main dual carriageway and that they were only permitted to turn to their left, not proceed across my path.

My insurers are currently waiting for TP defence statement, as the TP insurers did not respond to any correspondence after the accident, TP insurers had asked for extension and also only advised they will be looking to counter-sue (with hired solicitors). My insurers have no additional information, but I am interested on which grounds they will likely build a case around.

reinhard beck 15 months ago


I'm at a loss to be honest as to what the TP insurer are up to. The TP vehicle was (in other words) crossing your path from right to left and as far as I'm concerned they don't have a leg to stand on (hence the request for an extension perhaps). They perhaps have some additional information that they perhaps will help their case. But if that is so why be so coy? I don't get it. Perhaps they think they have a witness. But what if that witness confirms your story, where does that leave them?

Perhaps you did something to "cause" the accident but it was the actions by the TPV which caused the accident. I am betting that the reason they want an extension is because they are difficulty getting their PH to co-operate. If that is the case there is a time limit (not sure how long) but after a period of time the TP must accept liability on behalf of their policyholder.

carol 15 months ago

if its a two way street and lots of traffic both ways and your comming out of a parking lot with cars obstructing the veiw that are parked along the road your making a left hand turn which there is a bend in the road and traffic that comes around a corner to the left you have to be aware of so when you get that wating clear path which is clear on your left and about to be come clear as you look to the right to you which is the direction of traval you will also be heading you have creeped out because the left is clear and are in a stationary position and around the bend to your left comes a car and hits you on the drivers side doesent even brake or slow down basically doesent even see you as you are about to continue your turn who isat fault or is it considered a both fault

reinhard beck 15 months ago

Hi Carol,

If you are exiting a car park and you are hit by a car on the road - you will be at fault. They have right of way. If you want to join the stream of traffic on the road it is your responsibility to do that safely. Andd even if you take all possible care and an accident still happens - it's still your fault.

Joyce Gilding 14 months ago

Hi Reinhardbeck,

I was driving on the Main Street, indicating left thinking that I have it was on the entrance for Currys. I then changed my mind and went straight and a car from the side street pulled out and hit me on the side of my car. I even tried to avoid her and move to the next lane but she still hit me. The damage was so bad that the car is a write off. Their insurer do not want to accept full responsibility. Now my insurer says that I must have slowed down before I have approached the left turn because there was a row of green fence on the left blocking my view, at which point did I find out that it was not Currys. I said as there was a sign outside which I could spot from a distance, I knew it wasn't the right place. Third party is now claiming that I have made the manoeuvre to turn left then turned out again, which made them have the right of way. I denied this claim because I definitely didn't turn left and turn out again,it would not be physically possible.

Please help ! It feels that the insurance company is not making any effort to contact witness or do anything, it was the accident management company who told me all this, and they say it looks like a 50-50. What do you think?

Thanks and regards


reinhard beck 14 months ago

Hi Joyce,

I can't see what the arguement here is. You were on the main rd and therefore you had the right of way. The other side cannot hold you responsible for something they thought you might (but didn't) do. What looks what happened (from 3rd party pov) is that they saw you indicate and they assumed you were going to turn into the next side str and so pulled out and because you didn't turn left but went straight on you got hit.

There is a test case that might help you here but unfortunately I can't remember what it's called. The law used to be that if you were on a main rd and indicated left (but didn't) but went straight on and were hit by a car exiting a side street you were at fault. (As happened here).

But it went to appeal in 1962 and it was decided that actuallyy it was up to the car in the side street to wait and see if in fact you did make a left turn or not...and then exit the side street. Your insurer should know all this and also they should know that accident management companies are an expensive plague. Don't listen to them saying it's 50-50 it's what the insurance companies think that counts since they will be the ones paying the costs of this.

Hi Reinhard Beck 14 months ago

I was stationary behind a vehicle in side road. Both of us were turning to the left. The vehicle in front of me pulled forward to turn left and it was in an angle of about 45 degree. I moved forward and moved my head to check for oncoming vehicles from the right hand side. There was a vehicle coming from that way at distance of about 200m (max distance visibility as there is a top of a small hill...). I decided to pull out too. But the car i front of me has stalled or stopped suddenly in that couple of seconds when i was checking to the right. I did not even get the chance to see something. I drove straight in the care stopped in front of me from 0 to whatever speed you can get in around 4-5 meters. I've got a lot of damage to my car because of the towbar fitted on the other car. The lady driver gone mad (yelling, swearing, slamming my car doors) then she refused to give me her name, than she gave me a different name. I phoned the police because two blokes showed up and they seized my car keys from ignition....

My question is am i entirely at fault? I don't feel like that. I do not comment about lady's way of driving but only it seemed weird.

Lancelotte 14 months ago

Hi Reinhard Beck

My wife parked badly in the road, leaving the road narrower than it should have been.(about 18-24 inches from the curb. She came into the house and asked me to park the car better. I went out to to do this but in the time she came to tell me and me going back to the car, a large truck style ambulance (not going to an emergency) came down the road and scratched the car. The driver apologised but said he would have to report the scratching in case there was damage to the ambulance. If there was damage it would be very slight, but I am concerned that my insurance would not cover the damage to the ambulance if there was any due to my wifes parking. What do you think?

Reinhard Beck 14 months ago

hi Lancelotte,

If you have comprehensive insurance you'll be covered. In any case the "truck" is at fault here anyway. Just because your wife parked the car badly is a good reason to hit it. The driver will have seen it and should have taken measures to avoid it.

Ben 14 months ago

Hi Reinhart Beck

I was stationary behind a vehicle in side road. Both of us were turning to the left. The vehicle in front of me pulled forward to turn left and it was in an angle of about 45 degree. I moved forward and moved my head to check for oncoming vehicles from the right hand side. There was a vehicle coming from that way at distance of about 200m (max distance visibility as there is a top of a small hill...). I decided to pull out too. But the car i front of me has stalled or stopped suddenly in that couple of seconds when i was checking to the right. I did not even get the chance to see something. I drove straight in the care stopped in front of me from 0 to whatever speed you can get in around 4-5 meters. I've got a lot of damage to my car because of the towbar fitted on the other car. The lady driver gone mad (yelling, swearing, slamming my car doors) then she refused to give me her name, than she gave me a different name. I phoned the police because two blokes showed up and they seized my car keys from ignition....

My question is am i entirely at fault? I don't feel like that. I do not comment about lady's way of driving but only it seemed weird.

Reinhard Beck 14 months ago

hi Ben,

Yes you are. If you hit someone in rear it's always your fault.

James banner 10 months ago

Hi, i was wondering if anyone would have some advise for me.

At the bottom of my road we have an area were you could turn you car around. As I went to turn my car around a parked car on my right had reversed into my rear quarter driver side. He is trying to say I should have seen and made sure before i had pulled in to turn my car around. But my argument is that I was in there first before he had reversed also this would be suggested as the damage was to the rear and not the front. Any advice on whos fault it could be as there are no other threads on the internet with similar matters. Im based in the UK.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 10 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hi James,

You say "as I went to turn my car around..." does that mean you were stationary? If you were then the other driver would be at fault (but I think you'll have a problem proving that because he can easily say you moved into his path). And so if you were moving then it will be a split liability in my view for 2 reasons a) it will be argued you should have checked to sure that all was clear & b) the other driver shd have done the same before moving from his parking place. The majority of this blame would still lie with the other driver as he was reversing.

James banner 10 months ago

Hi, yes i was moving, but the thing is I was 3 quarters of the way in as the damage happened to my rear driver door.

reinhardBeck profile image

reinhardBeck 10 months ago from LEEDS Author

Hi again James,

That doesn't change anything though as far as liability (in my view) is concerned. He could say (and no doubt will say it to his insurer) that he was already reversing when you started to move your car directly into his path and he couldn't help but hit you. I still think it will end up as a split liabilty. Though I still think that the majority of the blame lies with him - because he was reversing.

alan 10 months ago

i reversed into an opening to turn my car and continue my journey in opposite direction ,as i changed from reverse to first gear and moved forward i saw a van reversing out of an opening in front of me onto the main road i was on,do aviod collision i immediatly braked and stopped the van which was then about six feet from me clearly wasnt stopping so i sounded my horn loudly but it continued till it colloided with the front of my car ,,the driver then stepped out and said he did not see me but it was my fault as id driven into him ,i sated id stopped dead and sounded my horn which he addmited he heard ,but still said it was my fault as i hadnt been there when he climbed into his van ,who is at fault please .

John 7 months ago

I was sat at the traffic lights in Clarence road ,next to a Peugeot dealership, Robins & Day , Clarence road , Bristol BS1 6PR. In my car , I was in the left hand lane , the road traffic markings indicate that this lane is for traffic going straight ahead or who want to turn left into Temple gate. The lane next to me is the right hand lane, the traffic markings for this lane indicate that this lane is for traffic going ahead only, in this lane was a Black Range Rover Evoque . The lights changed to red-Amber, then green so I pulled away, I had travelled approx. 12’ & was now level with the corner of Temple gate , At this point the Black Range rover Evoque which was in the Right hand straight ahead only lane turned left into the side of my car. The large front wheels of the Range rover smashed the offside front wing of my Car & slid along into the front wheel of my car. The lady wound down her window & said “ Your lane is for turning left only” , it is clearly not!

It was a very windy & rainy day & very high volume of traffic so we moved the cars into Temple gate to exchange details etc.The lady was very surprised that there was no damage to her car & yet mine was caved in , it was because the she had turned the wheel so much that only her front wheel Tyre was touching & pushing my car out of the way, my car was bobbing up & down as she accelerated around the corner towards Temple gate whilst in the right hand lane that is marked ahead only ! I asked for her Insurance details & she gave me a business card, I said this was not enough & she then gave me her name address & a policy number with name of Insurance company. It turned out that this was no longer her Insuarnce company ,but they did give me her current Insurance companys details.

It has been nearly 90 days Now & she ahs not reported it to her Insurance company, my Insurance company said @ 90 days they will discuss whether to take her Insurance company to court. Since then her Insurance company have demanded she attends a meeting with them for her side of the event.

Now my Isuarnce is up for renewal & my Insuarnce company have Increased the premium from £190 to £415 & have taken yrs NCB from me is this fair, as they ahve alway maintained they are holding her wholly responsible ?

Reinhard Beck 7 months ago

Hi John,

The reason why she hasn't reported the accident to her insurance company is that there was no damage to her car (that's the usual reason why people don't report an accident). Until the claim is settled your insurer will assume the worst & thats why they have increased your premium and taken 2 yrs ncb from you. You'll get it all back if the ladies insurer accept full liability.

John 7 months ago

Hi Reinhard , they actually have taken 4 years NCB & a 120% increase. Will I get the £550 Excess ,plus the extra £260 back & my 4 years NCB back ?

Is she liable as she crossed into my lane to turn right when she was in a ahead only marked lane ?

Many thanks Reinhard

Reinhard Beck 7 months ago

Hi John,

Wow! they've taken 4 ncb & increased your premium by 120%. Never heard that before. Is there just one claim going on here? Because in my experience until a claim is settled both sides involved loose 2ncb until liability is confirmed. Once the claim is settled (and I would expect it to be settled in your favour) your ncb will be re-instated and your premium recalculated to reflect that. You will also get back any excess you might have paid.

R.B.M 6 months ago

I was at a turn, to turn on the main highway. The highway that I was merging on had the right of way. It was also a 45 mph highway. The cars were going pretty slow, so, I yield and I turned to the right. I was a couple minutes down the road, and I was hit. The person that was driving couldn't have been looking in front of them, and surely was driving to fast. The car was going full speed. But, I was told it was my fault. Because, that lane had the right of way. Is this right?

Reinhard Beck 6 months ago


I'm not sure what happened from your description. What do you mean by..." I yield and I turned to the right. I was a couple minutes down the road, and I was hit." If you were on the main road when you were hit in the rear then it's not your fault. But, if you entered a main road from a side street and crashed with another car then you would be at fault.

Denny Xie profile image

Denny Xie 6 weeks ago from Sydney

Hi John - Great piece on the different types of claims

reinhard beck 6 weeks ago


    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article