GateKeeper
Well-known member
Makes for quicker getaway's as well.....since your already pointed in the right direction...
.
.
Accident in mall parking lot. 50/50 fault. Will my rates go up?
- Thread starter TRIGGA
- Start date
JFD
Well-known member
pretty sure private property is mostly 50%. Wife had an incident couple years back.
she pulled into a spot and the parked car opened their door. APparently this is the one case where there's a fault. The person opening the door needs to ensure it's safe to do so.
Otherwise everything else is 50% since it's not governed by HTA.
she pulled into a spot and the parked car opened their door. APparently this is the one case where there's a fault. The person opening the door needs to ensure it's safe to do so.
Otherwise everything else is 50% since it's not governed by HTA.
It's almost always better to reverse into your parking space. Having that better visibility when exiting the space is priceless. I even back my bike into spaces as well.
Maybe if you're grocery shopping and need access to your trunk, then reverse parking wouldn't be ideal.
There are two main techniques to reverse parking.
#1 where you drive two or three spaces away and start backing in
#2 where you start backing in closer to your desired space.
I feel with technique #2 you block more of the feeder lane (more protection), so there is less room for bone headed drivers to squeeze through. It also makes your intentions much more clearer to surrounding traffic.
What technique was OP's friend using?
Maybe if you're grocery shopping and need access to your trunk, then reverse parking wouldn't be ideal.
There are two main techniques to reverse parking.
#1 where you drive two or three spaces away and start backing in
#2 where you start backing in closer to your desired space.
I feel with technique #2 you block more of the feeder lane (more protection), so there is less room for bone headed drivers to squeeze through. It also makes your intentions much more clearer to surrounding traffic.
What technique was OP's friend using?
Riceburner
Well-known member
I back into parking spots as much as possible....except for grocery shopping where I need to put stuff in the trunk.
I don't understand what you are saying. Why can't a Police Officer assign fault and yet not charge anyone? They show up after the collision at which time the vehicles may have been moved and because of this may feel that they don't have enough evidence for court (conviction) but in the report will assign fault. They understand how insurance companies work and may try to help; or they may not assign any fault if everyone including witnesses is contradicting each other.
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
Since the vehicles traveling down the lane have right of way, when they t bone you while you're backing out, it's your fault. Besides if you're backing in and there's an issue with the spot, it's easier to get out. For some strange and magical reason I just assumed that anyone who rides would understand that. Imagine trying to back a bike up a step hill into moving traffic? Not gonna be a good time at all.
PLau
Well-known member
151...?
Highways designated for use of paved shoulder
151. (1) The Minister may by regulation designate any part of the King’s Highway where the paved shoulder may be driven on, and may make regulations,
(a) regulating the use of the paved shoulder on a designated part of the highway and prescribing conditions and circumstances for that use, including prescribing rules of the road applicable to the use of the paved shoulder, exemptions from any requirement in this Part or in a regulation made under this Part applicable to the use of the paved shoulder and conditions and circumstances for such exemptions;
(b) providing for the erection of signs and the placing of markings,
(i) on any highway approaching any part of a highway designated as having a paved shoulder that may be driven on, and
(ii) on any part of a highway designated as having a paved shoulder that may be driven on;
(c) prescribing the types of the signs and markings referred to in clause (b), instructions to be contained on them and the location of each type of sign and marking. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
Classes, types of vehicles, drivers
(2) A regulation made under subsection (1) may prescribe different classes or types of vehicles and different classes of drivers and may define the class or type in relation to any characteristics, including the owner or operator of the vehicle, the purpose for which the vehicle is being used or the employer of or training taken by the driver. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
Same
(3) A regulation made under subsection (1) may be general or particular in its application and may apply differently to different classes or types of vehicles or different classes of drivers. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
When designation is in effect
(4) No designation made under this section becomes effective until signs are erected in accordance with this section on the designated part of the highway. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
Non-authorized use of shoulder prohibited
(5) No person shall drive on the paved shoulder of any part of the King’s Highway except in accordance with this section and a regulation made under it. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
Act, regulations otherwise apply
(6) Except as otherwise provided in a regulation made under this section, the provisions of this Act and its regulations applicable to vehicles apply with necessary modifications to the operation of a vehicle on the paved shoulder of a designated highway. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
Paved shoulder deemed not part of roadway
(7) A paved shoulder on any part of a highway that is designated under this section shall be deemed not to be part of the roadway within the meaning of the definition of “roadway” in subsection 1 (1) or part of the pavement for the purposes of clause 150 (1) (b). 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 24.
With rear view cameras...pedestrian and object sensors in rear sides and front...attention assist... lane assist... accident prevention I don't think its a problem backing out of my spot.
On second thought I'll say "uncle" you guys win, I am a changed man reversing is the way to go.
Tomorrow gonna backup all the way to work to practice.
Ps Baggsy your post makes no sense T-bone in a parking lot LOL ...Issue with the spot like what uneven pavement. I don't ride so I wouldn't understand and I've never had to back a bike up a hill into moving traffic LOL
On second thought I'll say "uncle" you guys win, I am a changed man reversing is the way to go.
Tomorrow gonna backup all the way to work to practice.
Ps Baggsy your post makes no sense T-bone in a parking lot LOL ...Issue with the spot like what uneven pavement. I don't ride so I wouldn't understand and I've never had to back a bike up a hill into moving traffic LOL
Last edited:
It's not just him saying it, that's the way it is.
What you don't trust the knuckles?
None of those nanny features look for cross traffic in the rear while you are backing out and unable to see. They will warn you that you are backing into an object, but not that you are cutting someone off and about to get nailed.
Good idea put the NANNY in the back seat and all is good
Gotta get me a roll of caution tape for my next parking adventure
Rules for Automobiles in Parking Lots
16.
This section applies with respect to incidents in parking lots.
The degree of fault of a driver involved in an incident on a thoroughfare shall be determined in ccordance with this Regulation as if the thoroughfare were a road.
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.
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.
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.
As for bikes, they can be a real pain to duck walk backwards out of a spot, and you're going to be moving much more slowly than any car, plus you have to yield to cross traffic. It all adds up to using a drive through spot if you can, a u turn spot next, and then backing up.
Not a follow the rules kinda guy and have you never heard of the side stand swivel spin point and go......no duck walking needed .....................For some strange and magical reason I just assumed that anyone who rides would understand that.
Last edited:
It works until your side stand breaks, and you end up under your bike, but then at least it's funny.
Its not 50/50%, insurance company determines who is at fault. They'll determine whos fault it is, no automatic 50/50.(story time)My wife was sitting in her car and some lady opened her door and it was windy outside and boom the door went flying and dented my wifes car and took the paint off to the metal. They lady freaked out and when my wife confronted and as my wife opened her door and the door taped her mirror (scratching the pastic on the mirror)and now the lady was claiming 50/50. We offered the lady settle out of insurance but she didn't want to pay to fix my wifes car door and she kept talking out the scratch on her mirror(which is unpainted just black plastic) I told her we can go to toyota and get her a new mirror and pay for the install but she wouldn't have any of it. so we went through insurance. In the end the other driver never filed a claim (My understanding is the mirror scratch cost was lower then her deductible she would have to pay.) My wife insurance never went up or anything.
Please stop spreading incorrect information. Cops really should stop commenting on it because I've heard the same thing, incorrectly, from 3 cops as well.
As far as I'm aware, any time there is a collision involving two people if one person makes a claim the other company gets notified. Depending on the fault determination rules and the insurance company's investigation, if any percentage of fault is assigned to either person, their rates go up. 99% on person A, 1% on person B = both rates rise just as if either one were 100% at fault. Only way your rates aren't going up is if it's 100% the other person's fault. Even then, they claim your rates won't go up but they're probably secretly affected somehow knowing how much of a scam insurance is here.
Does this even count as a collision? I would think the other person made a comprehensive claim and that is why your wife's insurance wasn't affected.
