Only an idiot hits the car infront

[Kram]

I do not like the rhyming version of the phrase but that is what has happened to me today, hit by the van behind me, whilst reversing into a friends driveway. Its a main road and would be dangerous to reverse out of. I was going slow and indicating inplenty of time, with hazards on as I began the manouver. He wasnt looking.

Driver behind not paying attention, as I came to a slow stop, positioned for reversing, he was going too fast and has tried to squease down the nearside and smashed the front wing. He was in a transit van, appears to be a gardener, towing a trailer of woodchip.

Thats the damage. It was blocking the road so didnt get a photo in position tho I should have!

Insurance are telling me it will likely be disputed and I will be held at fault, with my car due to age, being considered unecpnomical to repair - dispite it being impossible to get the same for what I imagine, they would try to offer

I have never had to make a claim for damages from another driver before. Feels like they are trying to avoid paying out.

 

[Erie Fred]

You would be found at fault because of the age of the vehicle ?
Oiy !

 

[indykid]

Hazards on? How is anyone supposed to know where you're going with hazards on?

Did you begin your maneuver with traffic approaching?

 

[harveyp6]

Is the damage limited to the wing? And if the wing is bolt on, then maybe you could keep the salvage if it goes through the insurance and buy a used wing and fit it yourself. Insurance companies always want to avoid paying out.

 

[Kram]

Hazards on? How is anyone supposed to know where you're going with hazards on?

Did you begin your maneuver with traffic approaching?

I was indicating right and slowing down on approach to the drive. I put hazards on as I started positioning to reverse.

 

[Screwdriver]

Bit of a conundrum since the Highway Code suggests you should only reverse along a busy road if it is safe to do so.

Since there was a van travelling at speed towards you, it was not safe! If you contest this, you might end up being accused of driving without due care and attention.

Now that our policing system appears to be much more keen to score a nice easy win than combatting actual crime, I'd be tempted to suck it up and move on.

 

[dobbslc]

Feels like they are trying to avoid paying out.

That's exactly always what they try to do

I'm pretty sure the wings are bolt on for those Mazda's, I even found a company selling pattern ones ready painted when we were looking at a Mazda 3 for the boy.
You could fix it yourself and not claim BUT if he claims against you it'll go on record then you'll have to declare it every year for 5 years and you lose your NCB.

Were you on your side of the road or the other?

 

[BrokenBiker]

Bit of a conundrum since the Highway Code suggests you should only reverse along a busy road if it is safe to do so.

Since there was a van travelling at speed towards you, it was not safe! If you contest this, you might end up being accused of driving without due care and attention.

Now that our policing system appears to be much more keen to score a nice easy win than combatting actual crime, I'd be tempted to suck it up and move on.

Highway code also tells people to look out the windscreen occasionally...Incase there is someone reversing Infront of you...could have easily been a broken down car, emergency stop, small child etc

Wouldn't be a difficult argument to win. Did the van driver see the indicators, brake lights, hazards and stationary vehicle?

I was about to reverse into a driveway after indicating my intention. I had slowed in plenty of time and even put my hazards on to show other drivers I wasn't simply stopping at the roadside. I checked my mirrors and started my maneuver with plenty of space when I saw a van that had failed to slow/stop. I stopped when I realised my actions would make things worse if I continued as I didn't know if he had seen me. At the last second he swerved between myself and the kerb, causing a collision and significant damage to the vehicle I rely on daily.

Be difficult for the van driver to talk his way out of hitting a stationary vehicle with hazards on...as usual with these case sit depends whose insurance is best at telling the story, but personally I would invite a motoring solicitor to intervene. Might cost a few quid but they usually get a bigger pay out, quicker and have that magical way of selling water to the fish

 

[Kram]

The highway code also states not to reverse onto a main road. This particular driveway has poor visibility, so it is significantly safer to reverse in.

He hit me before I started reversing. My car never went into reverse gear. Had I been doing an emergency top, or turning forwards in, he still would have hit me.

There was no oncoming traffic, the road was clear ahead. I had positioned to the right of the lane, slightly to the center of the road.

@BrokenBiker thank you!

 

[Screwdriver]

Dude, I am convinced. I sincerely believe you are a careful competent driver and not only does everything you say make perfect sense, it's exactly something I would do myself.

Unfortunately it's not me you need to convince. Insurance companies often conspire to reduce damages to the minimum possible and that's typically settling for a 50/50.

 

[cocker]

The insurance companies will go for the cheapest option . They all pee in the same pot . How's the neck sprain / whiplash ? Should be enough there for the repair , if you don't let the chiselers write your motor off .

 

[BrokenBiker]

The highway code also states not to reverse onto a main road. This particular driveway has poor visibility, so it is significantly safer to reverse in.

He hit me before I started reversing. My car never went into reverse gear. Had I been doing an emergency top, or turning forwards in, he still would have hit me.

There was no oncoming traffic, the road was clear ahead. I had positioned to the right of the lane, slightly to the center of the road.

@BrokenBiker thank you!

Oh, if you hadn't started reversing at that point then it's even less likely you were to blame...

You had slowed, indicated in good time and then used hazard warning lights...there's a clue in the title with that one...van driver clearly wasn't paying attention, didn't react correctly and utilise the empty road available to him...

 

[Norsk]

You stopped on a main road in order to reverse against the traffic direction and were struck by a van as you reversed towards him?

What was the speed limit?

 

[julianf]

There's no double yellows?

So you could have just been parking, without any intention of reversing?

And he would have hit you, a "stationary object".


If your car was not moving when it was hit, and there was no "no stopping" restrictions, id say it was fairly clear cut. But then im not the one making the decisions.

 

[Nomad]

Grandparents had a similar driveway, large stonewall and pillars, impossible to see the road if reversing out (and against Highway Code), even coming out nose first meant sticking the front of the car out past the gateposts with no idea what was on the road or footpath.

Getting out was bad, trying to reverse in was a nightmare if there was any traffic - it was a busy coastal route so quiet times were very limited.

Hope you get it sorted

 

[Bobupndown]

The vultures in the legal profession will be circling, barristers need their fees paying

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

As above, if it's written off just buy the scrap and stick a new wing on it from an identical car.

Scrap value will be very low...especially if they don't have to collect it. I bought my MR2 back and I think it was £350 or something crazy.

There is a big difference between being hit when reversing (ie in motion)...and being hit when stationary. You need to be very clear when you claim.

 

[RichardM]

What was your position in the road? Where you on the other carriageway?

Check rule 116

 

[addjunkie]

Knock for knock is an easy quick out for insurance company…arguing over blame takes time and costs money.
Suck it up and move on!

If its only the wing buy it back and repair

 

[cocker]

Knock for knock is an easy quick out for insurance company…arguing over blame takes time and costs money.
Suck it up and move on!

If its only the wing buy it back and repair

It's not " knock for knock" ! The dick in the van wasn't paying attention . Let their insurance pay and dick for brains can swallow the increased premiums . Don't use the "legal assistance" they're part of the pot ******* gang !