[mojo3]

If two cars are reversing, one into and slightly along a small cul-de-sac at about 1MPH and the other out of their driveway onto said cul-de-sac at about 4MPH and the one coming from the driveway hits the front end of the other one with his rear bumper, whose at fault?

[N0help4u]

More likely the one that was backing out of the driveway,

[JudyKayTee]

If two cars are reversing, one into and slightly along a small cul-de-sac at about 1MPH and the other out of their driveway onto said cul-de-sac at about 4MPH and the one coming from the driveway hits the front end of the other one with his rear bumper, whose at fault?

I would say 50/50 - in some States it is against the law to back out of a driveway (hard to believe) and it is others it is illegal to back along a public street.

Fault may depend on the State involved.

I question the 1mph speed - doesn't sound possible to me. Four mph? Maybe.

At 1mph the backing up car could be presumed to have stopped across someone's driveway while the person was already backing out and further at fault.

[froggy7]

I question those speed limits as well, since I wouldn't expect much, if any, damage, to occur at those speeds. But I also agree that the car backing out of the driveway has a greater responsibility to be sure that it can safely enter the road, so the accident is slightly more its fault.

[ScottGem]

I think it would deem to be shared as well. With both cars backing up, they both should have been aware of what obstacles were there.

[JudyKayTee]

I question those speed limits as well, since I wouldn't expect much, if any, damage, to occur at those speeds. But I also agree that the car backing out of the driveway has a greater responsibility to be sure that it can safely enter the road, so the accident is slightly more its fault.

Would be curious to see - if this is a real case and not homework or simply a question - what the end decision would be.

I would think you could be expected to be backing out of a driveway but a car would not be expected to be backing down the street; therefore, the driver backing down the street had a higher degree of responsibility (had to anticipate a car would be backing out).

Similar but different - bike riding a car against traffic is hit by a car. It takes some of the responsibility away from the driver of the car because you cannot anticipate a bicycle on the wrong side of the street, approaching you "from the wrong side."

I further question whether a car can actually GO 1 mph - I am positive mine cannot.

[N0help4u]

Yeah I always heard the car on the road had more right of way.
So I think it would be ruled more in their favor.

[Fr_Chuck]

There are many issues, as to exactly were the Point of Impact was, and to the specific state rules and even city rules on some of the issues. Traffic moving on the street will normally be considered having the right of way over traffic coming out of a drive way. The vechile in a drive why normally is expected to give right of way to traffic moving in the road.

[froggy7]

Would be curious to see - if this is a real case and not homework or simply a question - what the end decision would be.

I would think you could be expected to be backing out of a driveway but a car would not be expected to be backing down the street; therefore, the driver backing down the street had a higher degree of responsibility (had to anticipate a car would be backing out).

Which I would generally agree with, but for the fact that the road was described as a cul-de-sac. And I have seen some cul-de-sacs where the only way out of them was to reverse to a point where you can pull into a driveway. But then there are some where you can turn around easily. So, that's back up in the air, imo.

[sideoutshu]

The guy coming out of the driveway should be found more at fault. When two vehicles collide while in motion, a finding of fault usually accompanies the driver who stikes the other with the "front" of his vehicle in his direction of travel. Since both cars were going backwards, the "front" would actually be the back.

So the vehicle in the driveway should have had control over the direction in which his vehicle was traveling with aduty to see what was in his path. The vehicle in the road had a clear path in the direction he was traveling in.