Parking lot accident fault determination
Edit: the reason she told me is that my speed at time of collision didnt matter. Only the gear matters. I have to be at Park or Drive, not Reverse.
Edit2: The accident happened in Ontario
Jul 2nd, 2020 9:48 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 9:49 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 9:57 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 10:52 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:03 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:17 am
I was fully in the laneway. His head was in the parking space.EP32k2 wrote: ↑ This will be tricky as you were not in the laneway. If you were still fully in the lane and the other car backed out and hit you, you would not be deemed at fault. If both parties are in a spot or partially insurance usually goes 50/50. Fight this of course by insisting and going higher up and like vkizzle suggested contact the ombudsman if all else fails.
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:23 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:29 am
That sounds like insurance bullshitting you. Quote the fault determination rules R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (4) as I posted in my previous post. It says nothing about what gear you're in, just which car was in motion and where each car was.
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:42 am
I didnt honk since I didnt think it could happen. He drives a recent model of a high end brand, which should be equipped with rear camera and parking sensor. Plus, there is always the mirror.
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:48 am
Jul 2nd, 2020 11:50 am
Drawing is definitely not my strength...aZnRYcEbOi wrote: ↑ Below are the fault determination rules. Can you draw a diagram to show where exactly your car was when the other person backed out? Where is the damage on your car, is it your rear bumper and his rear bumper, or did he hit you on a rear fender or rear door?
Was your car still in the feeder lane, and not yet in the spot you were backing into? If so, I think #4 should apply to your scenario and especially if you have dashcam footage showing you were stopped for 5 seconds.
As for escalating to the ombusdman...it's better than doing nothing, but don't hold your breath.
Who is your insurance company? Mine is TD Meloche Monnex (now TD Insurance) and I've gone through their dispute escalation process last year. It is terrible. First you deal with the adjustor, then escalate to the manager, then escalate to TD Customer Service, then escalate to TD Ombudsman. Very disappointing customer service and pure incompetency on every level, and due to the volume of cases they have, each step takes a LONG time (several weeks).
Rules for Automobiles in Parking Lots
16. (1) This section applies with respect to incidents in parking lots. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (1).
(2) The degree of fault of a driver involved in an incident on a thoroughfare shall be determined in accordance with this Regulation as if the thoroughfare were a road. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (2).
(3) If automobile “A” is leaving a feeder lane and fails to yield the right of way to automobile “B” on a thoroughfare, the driver of automobile “A” is 100 per cent at fault and the driver of automobile “B” is not at fault for the incident. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (3).
(4) If automobile “A” is leaving a parking space and fails to yield the right of way to automobile “B” on a feeder lane or a thoroughfare, the driver of automobile “A” is 100 per cent at fault and the driver of automobile “B” is not at fault for the incident. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (4).
(5) In this section,
“feeder lane” means a road in a parking lot other than a thoroughfare;
“thoroughfare” means a main road for passage into, through or out of a parking lot. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (5).
Jul 2nd, 2020 12:18 pm
Jul 2nd, 2020 12:23 pm
My damage is on the body part around the rear passenger side tire. His damage is on driver side both doors. The drawing didnt show that because the rear side parts are not flat. They are slightly outward by design.aZnRYcEbOi wrote: ↑ Nice pic...lol.
Can you clarify where is the damage on his car, and where is the damage on your car?
Based on your drawing, if your car was still in the feeder lane, then you should call your insurance and quote R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 16 (4). The other driver should be 100% at fault because he was going from parking spot to a feeder lane.
Jul 2nd, 2020 1:10 pm
Jul 2nd, 2020 1:31 pm
Because it's side damage on both cars, then it isn't as clear cut based on pure physical evidence.
Jul 2nd, 2020 1:41 pm
Honking is for safety. It alerts people when used properly and appropriately.waterloong wrote: ↑ I didnt honk since I didnt think it could happen. He drives a recent model of a high end brand, which should be equipped with rear camera and parking sensor. Plus, there is always the mirror.
In general, I avoid honking people. Because I feel it is disturbing and could make newbies nervous and apply gas instead of brake. Maybe I should start to honk more
Jul 2nd, 2020 1:48 pm
Jul 2nd, 2020 2:17 pm
I told them reverse and I didn't plan to lie anyway.
Jul 2nd, 2020 2:20 pm
He doesn't need to change his story. He can be in reverse gear and stopped for 5 seconds. He just needs to quote the fault determination rule 16 (4) and say he was in the feeder lane, and the other car was coming into the feeder lane. It is based on where your car was and who has right of way --> car in feeder lane has right of way.
Jul 2nd, 2020 4:47 pm