Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    goodridge's Avatar
    goodridge Posts: 4, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #1

    Jul 6, 2009, 04:56 PM
    Car was hit by another car when reversed from the parking lot
    My car was parked on one-side of parking lot with one-way aisle. When I reversed my car to the middle of the aisle, I stopped there as I found a car from the parking lot behind my car rapidly reversed and hit on my car. My car was damaged with a deep dent and caused problem with the light-signal system. It's very clear that my car was hit by that car. Unfortunately, the car's insurance company make a judgment for only 50%responsibility because, the insurance told me it's illegal to stop the car in the middle of the aisle. Is this true? Why do I need to take 50% responsibility while I stopped there without moving?

    Thanks for any answer.
    JudyKayTee's Avatar
    JudyKayTee Posts: 46,503, Reputation: 4600
    Uber Member
     
    #2

    Jul 6, 2009, 05:00 PM

    You can always go to Small Claims Court to fight the decision of the insurance company.

    The other side will argue that they didn't expect you to stop in the driving lane. That, of course, does not allow the other driver to simply hit you.

    Why were you stopped in the driving lane, without moving?

    If you can't resolve the problem, file in Small Claims Court.

    No one knows what the law is in your State unless you provide what State you are living in.
    goodridge's Avatar
    goodridge Posts: 4, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #3

    Jul 6, 2009, 05:24 PM

    Thanks. Actually I was very careful with reverse because my 6-year old son was in the car. So I reversed my car very slow, just stop-reverse-stop, and then was hit by that car while my car was stopped. I did not see that car before the hitting. The driver is an experienced hitter as she drove her car back to the parking lot rapidly after her car hit on our car. I couldn't get a witness and didn't call 911 but just change the information.

    I just spoke to the insurance company I won't accept their decision, but I need to have my car inspected and evaluated for repair. They have made an appointment for me but I was told the result would be the same, 50/50. If I have my car inspected, does it mean I have accepted their decision? And if it will have bad influence for going to Small Claims Court?

    I'm in California.

    Thanks.
    JudyKayTee's Avatar
    JudyKayTee Posts: 46,503, Reputation: 4600
    Uber Member
     
    #4

    Jul 6, 2009, 05:44 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by goodridge View Post
    Thanks. Actually I was very careful with reverse because my 6-year old son was in the car. so I reversed my car very slow, just stop-reverse-stop, and then was hit by that car while my car was stopped. I did not see that car before the hitting. the driver is an experienced hitter as she drove her car back to the parking lot rapidly after her car hit on our car. I couldn't get a witness and didn't call 911 but just change the information.

    I just spoke to the insurance company I won't accept their decision, but I need to have my car inspected and evaluated for repair. They have made an appointment for me but I was told the result would be the same, 50/50. If I have my car inspected, does it mean I have accepted their decision? and if it will have bad influence for going to Small Claims Court?

    I'm in California.

    Thanks.


    I'm an accident investigator and so I look for discrepancies - in the original post you say "I found a car from the parking lot behind my car rapidly reversed and hit on my car." Now you say you never saw the other car before the hitting. If you didn't see it you have no idea if it was "rapidly reversing." You are just surmising that it did.

    It is also an assumption on your part that the other driver was an "experienced hitter."

    Both of these statements are not helpful to your case in any way. When you discussed this with the insurance company (and I realize it's too late now) you should have stuck with what you know. You put it in reverse, backed up, stopped, put it in drive and got hit. That's all you know. Insurance companies look for every little mis-step on your part (as do accident investigators).

    We do have an insurance company on the site - she's very good and I'm not sure what her exact title is - but I'm going to ask her to jump into this with her opinion.

    No, having the damage appraised does NOT mean you are accepting their offer.
    Fr_Chuck's Avatar
    Fr_Chuck Posts: 81,301, Reputation: 7692
    Expert
     
    #5

    Jul 6, 2009, 06:14 PM

    Often the "assumtion" is first that you will lie after a accident, ( I know you are not, but their insurance company will assume)

    They think as most will that you both were going in reverse.
    Do you have any witness that can prove you were stopped and not moving.
    nikosmom's Avatar
    nikosmom Posts: 1,611, Reputation: 488
    Ultra Member
     
    #6

    Jul 6, 2009, 06:56 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by JudyKayTee View Post
    We do have an insurance company on the site - she's very good and I'm not sure what her exact title is - but I'm going to ask her to jump into this with her opinion.

    No, having the damage appraised does NOT mean you are accepting their offer.
    Thanks JKT :)
    (I'm an insurance agent.)

    The fact that you were both going in reverse at the time of the collision is what makes you each responsible for 50% of the damages. You were both responsible for looking to make sure the way was clear before proceeding. Without any witnesses that can say you were at a stopping point and she collided with you, then there's no way of proving one person was "more at fault".

    If you'd been backing out of the space, stopped momentarily to change gears, and then she backed out while you "owned" the aisle then perhaps you might have a case. Perhaps. But again, no witnesses... so you're stuck with 50%.

    As Judy said, you can always take the person to small claims and try your luck there but honestly I don't see much of a case because... umm I think I said this... no witnesses.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #7

    Jul 6, 2009, 07:32 PM

    Yep, sorry but you are stuck here. My dtr had a similar incident a year ago. She was actually stopped in a parking lot waiting for the driveway to clear, when someone else came around her and made a turn in front of her, clipping her car. The other driver claimed she was moving so the carrier called it 50-50.

    Your situation reminds me of an incident I witnessed. I had just made a turn into a lane of a parking lot when I saw two cars, directly opposite each other start to back up. I immediately leaned on my horn to warn them. One driver stopped, the other didn't. I gave the driver that stopped my info as a witness and his insurance made him 100% liable.
    goodridge's Avatar
    goodridge Posts: 4, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #8

    Jul 6, 2009, 07:46 PM

    Thank you Nikosmom and JKT. I agree that no witnesses is the problem.

    Regarding JKT's questions that "in the original post you say "I found a car from the parking lot behind my car rapidly reversed and hit on my car." -This is a wrong description in this post, sorry.
    "Now you say you never saw the other car before the hitting" -This is the fact, and I reported to the insurance like this. Thanks.

    I didn't lie, Fr-Chuck.

    It seems I have to accept 50%-50% based on your suggestions.

    Thanks a lot!
    passmeby's Avatar
    passmeby Posts: 473, Reputation: 11
    Full Member
     
    #9

    Jul 6, 2009, 10:18 PM

    It seems right that if both cars are backing up and subsequently hit each other, then it's 50/50. But if you say you stopped when you noticed the other car and the other car kept backing up, I wonder if there is a way to tell that through accident re-enactment, as in what the evidence shows as far as where the impact was and the estimated speed of the other driver vs your estimated speed(which you say was 0 MPH)? It's got to possible. Now if the other person was traveling through the lane of the parking lot (not backing froma space), he would've had the right of way and you would be 100% responsible. But if Iwas you, you should find the law that says that you cannot stop while backing out of a space, most importntly if it is a law, does it apply to private property or is it referring to pulling out of a space on city property (street parking), pulling into a public road. BIG difference! That doesn't make sense, as in, what if a child darted out into your path and you stopped to avoid hitting him. Dou you think they'd give you a ticket for stopping in the aisle to avoid a kid? Of course not, they'd give you a medal! Insurance companies will obviously try to pay out the absolute least amount of money and they will mislead you. If both cars simultaneously started backing up, and one stops to avoid collision yet the other doesn't stop and continues on eventually causing damage, it doesn't seem right to split the damage. The problem is proving it, which would require hiring a credible, licensed (or experienced) expert witness to study the impact. He would be able to prove that you were stationary yet the other car failed to see you and THEY caused the impact. I don't know where to find expert witnesses, but you could start searching hrough friends... have any of them worked for an ins company, or do they know anyone who has? Do you know anyone with a background in crime reconstruction? Contact the police, they might be able to help, I'd assume they could refer you to possibly an accident reconstruction expert, or if not, they could certainly give you tips on where to find one. The expert should EASILY be able to prove that you stopped immediately upon noticing the other car backing out based on your position (how far out of the parking space you were in relation to how far the other car traveled in addition to how the extent of the damage indicates how fast the other driver was going upon impact). If you had only pulled out slightly then stopped, the other car would have slammed you, whereas if you were both moving, both cars would show signs of a hard impact to both vehicles. If you were stationary, your dent should be larger ans also indicate scraping marks going in the direction of the way the other car was traveling whereas their car would probably not show much impact, and not the same force of imapct, as your car was stationary. This is just my opinion based on what I am picturing in my mind, I'm by means no expert!!

    If there really was a law that, once in the aisle, you cannot stop, that would mean that legally you're obligated to hit whatever happens to be in your path. No logic in that. If you were hindering traffic, then yes, you'd get in trouble, but most likely simply asked to move. I wouldn't believe this supposed law until I saw it in writing.

    It sounds to me like the ins company is trying to scare and intimiadate you. While yes, there are laws about stopping somewhere and if doing so you hinder the flow of traffic but stopping ANYWHERE to avoid a collission does not seem like an illegal act.

    Of course the expense you would incur to hire a lawyer for legal advice, and to hire an expert witness very well might be more that the cost of the damages so you have to weigh your options... unless you're lucky enough to know people who have the credentials to help you. Do you know a body shop worker? They could help. Think of all the people you know or have been acquainted with, maybe you know people who could help.

    Driving laws also CAN be null and void when you're on private property (not all of them, so research is needed). A store parking lot is private property. All those STOP signs within private parking lots are just requests, you can't get a ticket for ignoring them. Although, it's possible you can get a related ticket such as "Reckless Driving" (very rare), pretty much limited to if you cause damage or injury or are doing something completely foolish..

    You could try talking to the ins company, and be firm and unwavering (don't let them intimidate you). Tell them you have hired an expert witness that will be able to show that you were stopped at 0 MPH and the other vehicle was traveling at an unreasonable speed based on the location and extent of the damage to your car. Look up the law either online or at your local Law Library (the people who work in the Law Library are EXTREMELY helpful! ), arm yourself with your findings as long as they confirm that it isn't illegal to stop in this case to avoid a collission. Next time you deal with the ins company, speak with confidence, tell them your findings and tell them that your next step is hiring a lawyer. Avoid making any statements to the ins company, they will use EVERYTHING you say against you. They tend to act VERY friendly, it's just a ploy to gain your trust, they are just waiting for you to slip up. I could be wrong, but I do not believe that you HAVE to answer any of their questions until you go to court or are sent an interrogotory. There are questions that you very well MAY have to answer, but avoid answering anything. Avoid signing anything. If you must sign something (check with a lawyer first to be sure it mandatory) read it THOROUGHLY. In the case of making statements or filling out paperwork, it is a must that you have a lawyer to help you. Even a seemingly innocent phone call can (and probably is) an attempt to gather information to use AGAINST YOU! They will be sooooo polite and act like your best friend, it's just a ploy to get you to voluntarily give up information.

    Good luck and be cautious. These people can be so sneaky, they act SOOOOO nice, like they are trying to help you, in reality they are fishing for info and using any information to nail you. Be very wary of ANY odd phone call you receive that end up with someone asking you a lot of questions. You are under NO obligation to answer questions or givwe out personal information over the phone, you have no idea who this person really is and what they're after. Ask THEM a million questions. Keep a notebook and write down the time, date, the gyst of the conversation, the name and title of the person calling, etc.

    Here is a site that might help, it seems very informative. It tells what steps to take, and included phone numbers and websites for agencies that are there to help you:

    http://autorepair.about.com/od/addit.../a/dan_34a.htm

    Good luck. If it's true that you really were stationary and the other guy wasn't paying attention, then I really hope you get justice.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #10

    Jul 7, 2009, 03:44 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by passmeby View Post
    Good luck. If it's true that you really were stationary and the other guy wasn't paying attention, then I really hope you get justice.
    You have GOT to be kidding! While I'm not disputing what you are saying, lets look at the reality of the situation. There are no witnesses. Even if an accident reconstruction specialist was able to determine that that the OP was stopped, that is still not enough to determine whether the OP created a hazard by being stopped!

    Second, since the insurance carrier is determining this is 50-50, that means that the OP's carrier pays 50% of the other car's repair costs out of his liability and vice versa. So the upshot is that the OP's carrier covers his repair costs under his comprehensive and he just pays the deductible. The other carrier then reimburses him for 50% of the deductible and vice versa. Assuming he has a $500 deductible, he's only out $250 out of pocket. You think he's going to find a reconstruction specialist for less than $250?

    And since his carrier has already made the determination, he would most likely have to take the carrier to court to get back his $250. The reality here is that it's going to cost him more to fight this then he will get back. And the probablity that he would win is not that great.
    JudyKayTee's Avatar
    JudyKayTee Posts: 46,503, Reputation: 4600
    Uber Member
     
    #11

    Jul 7, 2009, 09:52 AM

    Here's my problem with this - a trained insurance agent and a trained accident investigator (with a combined total of a lot of years in the business) have both given their opinions based on those years of training and experience.

    The response is a lengthy post filled with inaccuracies from not having to answer questions from your own insurance company to garage employees being able to qualify as expert witnesses concerning an angle of impact.

    As far as whether a driver HAS to obey parking lot stop signs - don't obey them, get in an accident, be 100% at fault.

    As far as giving out information over the phone, taking notes, getting ID - as the insurance company has undoubtedly told the OP, you say, "I am unable to speak with you about this accident" and HANG UP!

    As far as it being illegal to stop in a driving lane AND, therefore, running over a child or a bike (due to the "do not stop" law) - preposterous and too far fetched to even address.

    And Scott summed it all up, including the dollar figures.
    passmeby's Avatar
    passmeby Posts: 473, Reputation: 11
    Full Member
     
    #12

    Jul 7, 2009, 11:49 AM

    Please don't dictate where and how I can post, and how long my posts can be.

    The OP said that she has been talking to the OTHER guy's insurance... I recommended to her to not talk to them, without legal advice. Never did I say to "Hang up on her own insurance company"... nor did I say to hang up on anybody.

    The OP claims that she was stationary and that the other car kept coming. Now, I totally understand that is is common practice to assume "LIAR", and no one here knows the truth of what happened and there is NO witnesses, which is why I suggested that she could get a QUALIFIED expert. An experienced, licensed, educated body repair man could qualify as an expert as long as he has vast experience and a good background. He would/should have experience in determining how the dents/scratches happened between two cars in an accident. It would be up to the court (or arbitration) to accept his testimony based on his experience and background.

    I used many words in there PURPOSELY that conveyed very clearly that I am by no means an expert TELLING someone what to do, only making suggestions. Words such as POSSIBLY, CHECK THE LAW FIRST, CAN BE (instead of ARE). I have had experience in an auto accident... actually 2 accidents (one mine, and one my husbands), and I am experienced in how the ins company will respond.

    If the OP wasn't professing her innocence, the I would not have responded at all, but she wants to prove her innocence, so my suggestions are valid. There is nothing wrong with suggesting CHECKING INTO getting a qualified witness to study the impact, there is also nothing wrong with being cautious in conversations with the other parties ins company.


    The OP wants to prove innocence and not have a record of an accident and have her insurance rates go through the roof, I would assume. After thinking about it, since she didn't call the police (who could've made an accident report that might have helped), my suggestion was toget an expert witness.

    To OP-Why didn't you call the police? Did one party not have valid license or insurance? If that's the case, then that changes things and should've been mentioned. Lots of times when the police aren't called, someone has a warrant, or no license, or no insurance... or worse, drugs in the car or they're DUI. If one (or both) person didn't have a license or was DUI then the insurance companie wouldn't be paying. That's not the case, is it?

    From one of the 2 Insurance Agents:

    Thanks JKT
    (I'm an insurance agent.)

    The fact that you were both going in reverse at the time of the collision is what makes you each responsible for 50% of the damages. You were both responsible for looking to make sure the way was clear before proceeding. Without any witnesses that can say you were at a stopping point and she collided with you, then there's no way of proving one person was "more at fault".

    If you'd been backing out of the space, stopped momentarily to change gears, and then she backed out while you "owned" the aisle then perhaps you might have a case. Perhaps. But again, no witnesses... so you're stuck with 50%.
    As Judy said, you can always take the person to small claims and try your luck there but honestly I don't see much of a case because... umm I think I said this... no witnesses.
    __________________
    Exactly, I completely understand this posters position, clear, concise... but look at the underlined portion, it backs up what I said that the OP could be innocent, all she has to do is prove it. Expert witness was what I thought of.

    Another thought I just had is, does the parking lot you were in have video surveillance? You should call immediately and ask. If they do, make an appointment to get down there and review the tapes to see if they show clearly what happened, and there you go, you have a great chance of getting vindicated! Good luck.
    JudyKayTee's Avatar
    JudyKayTee Posts: 46,503, Reputation: 4600
    Uber Member
     
    #13

    Jul 7, 2009, 12:30 PM

    I did not in any manner direct how long your posts should be and this is merely a backlash due to the explanation of site rules/procedures following out last disagreement - https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/small-...st-370375.html.

    As far as experienced auto body repairmen being sworn in as experts auto accident reconstruction experts are trained exactly in that - accident reconstruction. Not repairs, not guessing.

    I never said you told people to hang up on an insurance company. I'm the one who said to say you can't discuss the accident AND THEN HANG UP.

    Apparently you have some experience due to two auto accidents. I investigate well over a thousand a year. Your experience is very different from mine. Likewise you know from your experience how insurance companies react. My experience is different from yours.

    Whether people had a license, didn't have a license, had drugs in the car makes absolutely NO difference in this accident. The failure to have a license or having drugs in the car was NOT the proximate cause of the accident and is, therefore, meaningless.

    As far as her insurance rates going up - if she is with a company which increases rates based on accidents (and they don't all surcharge based on fault; many surcharged based on the number of accidents) she's already reported it!

    EDIT: I do Plaintiff's work. I very, very seldom work for the insurance company or the Defendant. I try to "make a case" for the Plainitff when there is a case to be made and when it's practical to pursue the matter. This is what I do; I'm not just guessing how things work.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #14

    Jul 7, 2009, 01:03 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by passmeby View Post
    Please don't dictate where and how I can post, and how long my posts can be.
    No one did any of that. The only thing that was done was criticize your post for being impractical and unhelpful. Which, In my opinion, it was! No one is denying your right to make a fool of yourself by posting something like what you have.

    Quote Originally Posted by passmeby View Post
    If the OP wasn't professing her innocence, the I would not have responded at all, but she wants to prove her innocence, so my suggestions are valid.
    But, previous responses indicated that the OP might not have been innocent. The circumstances were not at all clear whether the OP wasn't partially at fault. As to your suggestions being vaild, I disagree in THESE circumstances. In other circumstances, maybe not.

    Finally, you mention 2 experiences with insurance companies, You seem to think that balances the knowledge and experience of insurance agent and trained accident investigator.
    passmeby's Avatar
    passmeby Posts: 473, Reputation: 11
    Full Member
     
    #15

    Jul 7, 2009, 01:10 PM

    If you'd been backing out of the space, stopped momentarily to change gears, and then she backed out while you "owned" the aisle then perhaps you might have a case. Perhaps
    (from the insurance expert, see previous post)

    This is why I then suggested the following: From post # 12

    Exactly, I completely understand this posters position, clear, concise... but look at the underlined portion, it backs up what I said that the OP could be innocent, all she has to do is prove it. Expert witness was what I thought of.

    Another thought I just had is, does the parking lot you were in have video surveillance? You should call immediately and ask. If they do, make an appointment to get down there and review the tapes to see if they show clearly what happened, and there you go, you have a great chance of getting vindicated! Good luck.
    OK, now I will graciously take the hint and stay off the thread.
    nikosmom's Avatar
    nikosmom Posts: 1,611, Reputation: 488
    Ultra Member
     
    #16

    Jul 7, 2009, 06:50 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by passmeby View Post
    ...This is just my opinion based on what I am picturing in my mind, I'm by means no expert!!!!
    This is obvious.

    Quote Originally Posted by passmeby View Post
    (from the insurance expert, see previous post)

    This is why I then suggested the following: From post # 12

    OK, now I will graciously take the hint and stay off the thread.
    The fact stands the OP has no witness that can attest to anything that may or may not have happened that day. As Scott and Judy have both pointed out- 1) It'd cost WAY more to hire these experts to reconstruct the scene for such a minor incident. More than the OP stands to gain. 2) she's already filed the claim.
    goodridge's Avatar
    goodridge Posts: 4, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #17

    Jul 13, 2009, 08:26 PM

    I just got the mail from the insurance company. In the letter it noticed as below:

    "We have investigared the circumstances of the loss referred to above. Our obligation as an insurer is to pay damages for which our insured is legally liable. According to the information available to us to date, our investigation indicates the damages occurred because AAA(the name of the driver who hit my car) was backing when BBB (my name) backed up and stopped behind AAA's vehicle. Based on these facts, the percentage of negligence apportioned to you or your driver is 50%. The percentage of negligence apportioned to our insured driver is 50%."

    This means my car was stopped and can be hit by another car?

    Thanks!
    nikosmom's Avatar
    nikosmom Posts: 1,611, Reputation: 488
    Ultra Member
     
    #18

    Jul 13, 2009, 09:45 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by goodridge View Post
    I just got the mail from the insurance company. In the letter it noticed as below:

    "We have investigared the circumstances of the loss refered to above. Our obligation as an insurer is to pay damages for which our insured is legally liable. According to the information available to us to date, our investigation indicates the damages occurred because AAA(the name of the driver who hit my car) was backing when BBB (my name) backed up and stopped behind AAA's vehicle. Based on these facts, the percentage of negligence apportioned to you or your driver is 50%. the percentage of negligence apportioned to our insured driver is 50%."

    This means my car was stopped and can be hit by another car?

    Thanks!
    This means what I said in my first post... both of you were backing up at the time of the collision... there's no way of determining one being more at fault that the other so 50% is fair given the circumstances.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #19

    Jul 14, 2009, 04:36 AM

    This bears on what I said earlier. You were backing up at the same time and then you stopped creating a hazard. Definitely 50-50.
    JudyKayTee's Avatar
    JudyKayTee Posts: 46,503, Reputation: 4600
    Uber Member
     
    #20

    Jul 14, 2009, 08:01 AM

    This letter changes nothing that's been said. You were both equally at fault.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Reversed wiring? [ 1 Answers ]

I have replaced a ceiling light fixture. I matched black to 3 black in the ceiling box that were twisted together and capped. I matched white to 3 white in the ceiling box that were twisted together and capped. There is a separate ground. Now, the wall switch works opposite of what it should. ...

Can a 3 way switch reversed? [ 4 Answers ]

My electrician wired 5, 3way switches in my hall and the corresponding set of 5 in my games room. My problem is that when all 5 switches are in the down position in the hall and thus all 5 switches in the games room are in the corresponding up position, I still have 1 light that stays on. I...

Reversed polarity [ 3 Answers ]

What does reversed polarity mean a. the hot and neutral are wired forwards b. the ground and neutral are wired backwards c. the hot and neutral are wired backwards

Hot/Ground Reversed? [ 3 Answers ]

I've got a GFCI receptacle and a regular receptacle powered respectively by two different circuit breakers from the same power panel. When the circuit breakers are switched on, both receptacles have 120 VAC at their outlets and read "Correct" on a circuit tester. Now, when I plug my TV or...

Numbers reversed [ 1 Answers ]

Why are the numbers in phones and calculators reversed


View more questions Search