I hit a car that was driving w/out lights on; who is at fault.?

Question

This is in California by the way. I am sitting in a drive thru to order food. They tell me that the drive thru is not working rite now and i have to order inside. I had just been there for like 10 seconds. I look behind me and see that it is clear (my back windows are tinted), so i proceed in reverse. Next thing I know I hit a black car. This person is driving w/out his lights on. Nothing happened to his car, but my back bumper has his liscense plate indented on it. Anyone in traffic law know who is at fault?

It happened around 11PM. It is legal for me to tint my back windows. And I did look in the mirrors, but couldn't his car because a combination of his lights not being on, my windows being tinted, and his car being black. I guess it is up to the insurance companies.

I didn't drive forward because I was worried that there were other cars in front of me waiting to get their food (The drive thru curves).

Answer 1

Have you ever thought about going after the restaurant for not posting a sign that you could see & notice it before you were committed into the tight spot?

IF there had been a sign stating that the drive-thru was not working, you would have parked & walked in... but instead, you had to get into the one drive thru lane & then compromise your safety and the safety of others by putting it in reverse.

P.S..... DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT mention that your windows are tinted... unless anyone asks. It is an issue of disclosure. if it dont benefit you.... they dont need to know it.

Answer 2

Partly this depends on the jurisdiction. In some places other one or the other person is at fault. In some places fault is assigned proportionately.

Yes, the person was driving without lights, so is at fault.

But you also have to drive with a suitable level of care and attention (you didn't check your outside mirrors).

Then once the lawyers get to it, it gets worse.

The other car was stationary.
It was in an area that might be considered a driveway or parking area and so lights may not be necessary.

It goes on and on.

This is why lawyers probably earn more than you do.

Answer 3

I think this may be a comparative liability issue.

What time did the accident occur? Was it at dusk? If so, the other driver was at least partially at fault.

You can only back-up when safe; the other side will contend that you did not proceed safely, partly due to the tint in your windows obstructing your view. Thus, you may be partially at fault.

Speak with a good Civil attorney for advise. However, it sounds like no one was hurt, with a minimum of damage. You may be better off filing a complaint in small claims court.

Good luck!

Answer 4

First, tinting is not illegal in general (in any state), but it depends on how much. Lets assume yours is okay.

The other car was stationary, and you reversed.

You are at fault. But without a police report confirming it, you would probably not win in small claims court.

Since he was on private property (belonging to a company, not the public), he isnt technically required to follow the traffic laws, including headlights in the same degree he would on city streets. In a private setting, it would be more likely that the one who was moving was at fault.

I wouldnt worry about it, you would probably lose in small claims, and if you hired a lawyer, it would cost more than you would receive.

Im sorry, but its one of those things that just happens and sucks.

Answer 5

Actually, it is no one's fault. You didn't see the car, so it's not your fault you hit it. I mean, it's not like you went in reverse to hit intentionally.
However, it is not the driver's fault either. Perhaps he has a valid reason for not having his lights on, but yes, you're right, it WAS his mistake by leaving them off. It's not the driver's fault in a sense that by not having his lights on, he wasn't TRYING to get you to hit him. It was all an accident.
I suppose this argument would be valid to take further. However, since the driver made the mistake, you should end out on top. I will be honest with you, I am no expert in traffic law, but this is the way I see it justified. I wish you luck with this situation!

Answer 6

It would be your fault, the car was in a Private property. if you were going in reverse you should always keep your eyes on the road regardless if you are driving forward or reverse. if the person let you go, you should consider yourself lucky.

Most Drive Thur(s) are well lit and should have no problem in seeing anything behind you but in reading your message it seems like once you seen that it was clear, you took your eyes off the road behind you and started on reverse.

my question is Why didn't you go forward if the Drive Thur was closed?

Answer 7

You are. It is against most states laws to have glass tinted so much you can't see out of your rear window. Don't come here. We don't drive with out lights on except at night!

Answer 8

This is tricky. Did you file a police report? If not, it's up to both your insurance companies to hash it out. if the car w/out lights was moving and not parked, i would guess they would be liable or at least mostly liable for the accident.