Accident in mall parking lot. 50/50 fault. Will my rates go up? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Accident in mall parking lot. 50/50 fault. Will my rates go up?

TRIGGA

TRIGGA

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Forum Sponsor
Question for my freind.

He was in a accident at a mall parking lot and the cops came to do a report. The cop said it was 50/50 since it's in a private parking lot.

My question is if the other party claims insurance to fix their car but he does claim put a claim on his own insurance will his rate go up still for a 50% fault accident?


THE officer wasn't really clear and he is sitting bricks now. He was not at fault and his car doesn't have damage so there would be no point of claiming his ins. But the other driver car basically screw him even tho she caused the accident. If she claims insurance will he be screwed?

Any insight would be helpful.
 
Insurance company fault determinations don't necessarily match up with the police's. What happened?
 
He was reversing into a spot. The lady rather than wait she tried to go around and hit his bumper
 
Have him talk to his insurance agent before filing a claim. Insurance companies will assess fault themselves, and it's not necessarily the same as the way the police see it, and just because it is in a private parking lot does NOT mean that it is automatically 50/50. Just make sure that the police report accurately describes what happened and that photos of the damage accurately reflect this.
 
Sorry OP, but your friend may be 100% at-fault for the accident as per the Insurance Act - 'Fault Determination Rules'.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900668_e.htm

19. The driver of automobile “A” is 100 per cent at fault and the driver of automobile “B” is not at fault for an incident that occurs,
(a) when automobile “A” is backing up;
(b) when automobile “A” is making a U-turn; or
(c) when the driver of, or a passenger in, automobile “A” opens the automobile door or leaves the door open. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668, s. 19.​

http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/brochures/pages/brochure_claims.aspx

How Does an At-Fault Accident Affect Me?

If you are found more than 25 per cent at-fault for the accident, it is more than likely that your premium will go up on renewal.​
 
I was thinking the same thing. With both cars in motion, insurance will likely find your friend at least 25% at fault and he will get hit (assuming the other driver files a claim). An independent witness that says your friend was stopped when they were hit should make them 0% at fault and no insurance hit.
 
TRIGGA said:
He was reversing into a spot. The lady rather than wait she tried to go around and hit his bumper
Click to expand...

Which bumper, his front or rear ? did she try to sneak in behind him before he got into the spot (what a stupid move) or did she clip him on the front bumper as she did not judge the amount of space she had compared to the width of her car...
 
Platinum Cycle said:
Reversing, get ready to be 100% at fault.

The best bet here is to try and settle directly with the other driver.
Click to expand...

So I am in a parking lot, and I am backing into a spot and someone decides to be impatient and decides to rush through between me and the spot, and I am at fault, really...

how can I anticipate such a bone head move

and if so, great,,,,I need a new bumper and quarter panel, can't wait to set this one up in a parking lot with all the Christmas shoppers that are going to be out there, maybe if he or she hits me hard enough and damage my rim I will get a new one of those as well

good thing we don't have the right to carry firearms, or bats, or batons and so on......

but I would still like to know, was it the front bumper or the rear
 
I could never understand why people even back into parking spots. It's annoying to watch granpa..granma or soccer mom who can't drive for beans backing in and out adjusting for eternity and expecting patience. These are the same winners at the grocery store or mall trying to load groceries in the trunk being tight to the car behind. Love the backer uppers at the mall this time of year, the time it takes them to put that bus in reverse and line it up I'm in that spot already. Drive that puppy forward into that spot and be done with it. Makes more sense to me as getting into the spot people are impatient to find their own parking yet when backing out most will wait and let you out cause they want that spot.

Try it you might like it :rolleyes:
 
I back into parking spots because I'm not retarded and I can do it on the first try. The people who suck at backing into a space also suck at backing out of a space. Don't look, can't see, just go, pull out in front of someone and get hit.

I also drive a truck so there is no trunk.

I also park far away if possible so no one is around me.... because people suck at parking.
 
the bandit said:
I could never understand why people even back into parking spots.
Click to expand...

Because it's less hazardous to pedestrians, especially if you have a vehicle with lousy rear visibility. And, if you have a long vehicle, when it comes time to drive out again, and you have been surrounded by minivans and SUVs on either side, you have a lot less sticking out into the lane (where someone else driving past can hit it) before you can see.

Regarding the pedestrian point ... You have just driven past the spot and can confirm that it's clear before going in. When it's time to drive out again, pedestrians are right in front of you, clearly visible, instead of being behind you.

I always back in. I back in to my own driveway, because there are schools all around and a bus stop right across the street.
 
Police has no saying on who’s at fault or not in an accident, unless one of the parties gets charged.


Parking lot accident are extremely difficult to assess, both parties need to be interviewed by each insurance company, insurance companies at that time will evaluate what both drivers described what happen and make a decision who’s at fault.

There is always 3 stories, the 1[SUP]st[/SUP]party side of what happened, 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] party side and what really happened, both parties will twist the story to benefit them self’s, it’s up to the insurance company to evaluate what both parties have to say
 
Last edited:
Brian P said:
Because it's less hazardous to pedestrians, especially if you have a vehicle with lousy rear visibility. And, if you have a long vehicle, when it comes time to drive out again, and you have been surrounded by minivans and SUVs on either side, you have a lot less sticking out into the lane (where someone else driving past can hit it) before you can see.

Regarding the pedestrian point ... You have just driven past the spot and can confirm that it's clear before going in. When it's time to drive out again, pedestrians are right in front of you, clearly visible, instead of being behind you.

I always back in. I back in to my own driveway, because there are schools all around and a bus stop right across the street.
Click to expand...
If you drive a truck backing out of a parking spot can be a pain in the butt. And everyone should back into driveways, as it is not legal to back onto a roadway.
 
gsxr guy said:
If you drive a truck backing out of a parking spot can be a pain in the butt. And everyone should back into driveways, as it is not legal to back onto a roadway.
Click to expand...

What??? Reference plz.
 
gsxr guy said:
If you drive a truck backing out of a parking spot can be a pain in the butt. And everyone should back into driveways, as it is not legal to back onto a roadway.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to this law which states on roads in excess of 80km/h? Where people have a big enough driveway to loop around or do a U-turn and never back out anyways?

Backing prohibited, speed limit over 80 k.p.h.
157. (1) No driver of a vehicle shall back the vehicle upon the roadway or shoulder of any highway divided by a median strip on which the speed limit is in excess of 80 kilometres per hour. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 157 (1); 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 27.
Exception to subs. (1)
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to,
(a) an ambulance or fire department vehicle;
(b) a police department vehicle or a vehicle being driven by an officer appointed for carrying out the provisions of this Act;
(c) a person attempting to render assistance to another person; or
(d) a road service vehicle, if the movement is made in safety. 2009, c. 5, s. 48.
 
PLau said:
Are you referring to this law which states on roads in excess of 80km/h? Where people have a big enough driveway to loop around or do a U-turn and never back out anyways?

Backing prohibited, speed limit over 80 k.p.h.
157. (1) No driver of a vehicle shall back the vehicle upon the roadway or shoulder of any highway divided by a median strip on which the speed limit is in excess of 80 kilometres per hour. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 157 (1); 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 27.
Exception to subs. (1)
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to,
(a) an ambulance or fire department vehicle;
(b) a police department vehicle or a vehicle being driven by an officer appointed for carrying out the provisions of this Act;
(c) a person attempting to render assistance to another person; or
(d) a road service vehicle, if the movement is made in safety. 2009, c. 5, s. 48.
Click to expand...
. I believe its 151. Interfering with flow of traffic.
 
the bandit said:
I could never understand why people even back into parking spots.
Click to expand...

Brian P already answered, but I'll post another reason.

Because that is what driving schools are teaching nowadays?

When my girlfriend contracted Young Drivers to teach her how to drive, I objected to the reversing into the parking space. It didn't make sense to me. It requires the student to develop a lot of skills at once. But that's the way Young Drivers want the new drivers to do it, for safety, and based on a bazillion hours of research... when you think about it, makes sense. It is safer under most situations.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom