My sons accident in the schools parking lot?

abitawm

I have seen this situation multiple times in my line of work and I have seen different decisions come about it.

There is going to be statute in your state that says you should show caution and only back up when it was safe to do so. Unless you are in Michigan then I am assuming when you say no fault, the other insurance company assessed this accident to be 50% each drivers fault. What the other insurance company is saying is that both drivers were backing up and so they breached the same duty or law and will share the responsibility.

There are 2 scenarios I would feel comfortable to say that you would not be at fault in.

A. If your son was backing up and saw the other vehicle START backing and then tried to take evasive actions to prevent the accident(honking, pulling back in) then I would say that you can claim your son is fault free
B. If you car was hit more towards the middle of the car showing your son was obviously behind the other vehicle and the other vehicle kept backing

Or a combination of both(not proving A is another story)

If your impact was to the side but still towards the rear of the vehicle then you are going to lose some argument points because you canâ€™t prove our son was well behind the other vehicle.

If your son thought it was clear and then backed up and the accident happened and your son was surprised to see the other vehicle there, you canâ€™t claim your son was fault free. There was a car in the isle to be seen and by law, he did not back when safe(but neither did the other car). If he was backing up, he should have still been looking back and around for other cars and people walking the whole time he was backing. Even though the other person was backing up, your son would share some negligence.

On to actual decisions. I can only speak to Insurance company arbitrations as I see the decision results. When insurance companies disagree, they commonly send their cases for arbitration by a neutral panelist to make a decision. I hate to complicate this question but I have seen many different decisions but mainly #3 and #4 in a case like this.

1. A case was decided that the person backing from the parking space was at fault because the person in the isle was considered to have possession of the main through area.
2. A case was decided that the person backing up in the isle was at fault because the person backing from the parking space was hit on the quarterpanel(rear, by the tire)
3. Many cases get decided 50/50 as both parties are backing and it hard to prove one persons statement over another on who did what to cause the accident.
4. Many cases in condition 1 and 2 are not decided at 100% but maybe 60/40 or 70/30 with a decision of some minor negligence to the other driver

Unless you meet conditions A or B, it will be hard to show your son is not negligent in some part. Even if you can prove that the other party was more responsible, the most likely outcome is that the other company may still feel he was partially responsible and offer less then 100%(may 70% of damages). If there is a dispute from the other driver as to how this happened, then you can argue all you want, but it may not be possible to prove one statement over the other

mustanger

Remember, a wise man once said, "Opinions are like rear ends, everyone has one and they all stink". Having said that, the last time I had an accident in a parking lot where we were both backing up the insurance companys both agreed that two cars backing in a parking lot it was what they called "equal fault". In other words, you pay yours and I pay mine. You may not like it, I know i didn't, but that seems to be the consensus.

bostonianinmo

When a minor claim comes down to "he said - she said" with no clear and convincing evidence either way, insurance companies will usually agree to split the fault and the bill. Given the minimal amounts of money involved, it's hardly worth arguing over.

Of course, if you're in a no-fault state, then no-fault is the ONLY possible outcome for a minor fender-bender. Most no-fault states DO revert to tradational fault-finding when there is major property damage and/or significant injuries however with a minor fender-bender a determination of "no fault" is the only possible outcome.

Grand pa

We used to teach back into parking space Its safer more dificult but safer. Its now part of the driving test In British Columbia Canada

UCANTCME

THIS IS VERY COMMON AND IT IS A 50/50 CLAIM AND YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CHANGE IT NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO.

I HAVE SEEN MANY OF THESE TYPES OF ACCIDENTS AND THE OUT-COME WILL ALWAYS BE THE SAME.

frank

turn down your insurance companies offer and hire a lawyer. pay said lawyer a nice retainer. take it to court have judge tell you both at fault. pay court cost. pay off lawyer pay for damages to son's car.

bryan w

If the back of the other car hit the side of your son's, it seems like a no brainer. Speak with a lawyer should only cost like 25 dollars for their input.

johnny b good

Your son's accident is a no fault incident since neither driver expected the other to do what they did. If you do it in a parking lot like you suggested, you could be charged with insurance fraud, since it would be premeditated.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: