Who is at fault in parking lot accidents?

Question

I was waiting in line (not moving) to leave the lot. A girl reversed out of her spot and took off my left taillight with her rear. She claims that I was trying to get around her as she was backing out. Her insurance co. claims it's 50/50 fault.
Basically, I need to know if there are specific laws about who is at fault in parking lot accidents in PA so that I can take the ins co to court. A link to a specific website would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

Answer 1

There is no specific law.

If the insurance company is offering 50-50 - that means they got two different versions of events and were unable to break the tie - tell one version over the other.

If you have collision coverage - turn it into your company. They will take care of your damage under your collision and they will go back against the other company for payment.

By taking "the ins co to court" - I assume you are talking about filing small claims - you don't sue the insurance company - you sue the other driver. The insurance company will hire an attorney to defend their driver in court (they have to -it's in their policy).

So before you go and get all tied up in that- if you have collision - call your company.

If you do not have collision - you can file a complaint with the insurance department. The insurance company will have to justify their offer to the insurance department. Sometimes, this causes upper management to review the file and the company may change their position.

Answer 2

I don't know what the law is in Pennsylvania, but in California the person backing out is always 100% at fault. What I was told was that barring some other circumstance, it's the responsibility of the person backing out to look out for approaching cars.

My impression was that there wasn't a specific law so much as a general insurance guideline to parking lot accidents.

I would also try and see what your insurance company has to say about it too since this is a she says you say deal. The facts alone should be enough, she backed up and hit you. No other excuses needed. Sometimes insurance companies will try to pull a fast one because they think you don't know better. So it's best to have someone on your side who knows what's going on.

Good luck!

Answer 3

The other poster is essentially right. The general rule is whoever has the last opportunity to avoid the accident has the responsibility to stop.

With that being said, however, law enforcement may ticket anyone who apparently has committed a violation, such as improper backing, which would be evident in this case, even without being on scene. Even if you were trying to go around here, it sounds like she should have stopped.

From there, the insurance companies fall into their own way of doing things to determine fault, usually, but I can't say always taking any tickets into consideration. They call it risk mitigation, if I remember right. In this case, they have determined through their own methods that both drivers share the responsibility for this accident.

Answer 4

A motor vehicle this is backing up is in simple terms approximately continually at fault if there is an accident. So, sorry, you're in all probability going to be at fault for this one, various the fault besides. If she grew to become into dashing or driving at volatile speeds, insurance would placed in simple terms 20$ fault on her and 80% fault on you. yet what you will desire to do is permit your insurance business enterprise handle this and don't admit fault regardless. Your insurance could probable pay for many of her damages. yet once you're apprehensive approximately your insurance going up (in case you had different at fault injuries, etc.), it extremely is advisable to pay her out of pocket. If it is your first at fault accident and if the wear is below $500 (relies upon on your insurance business enterprise), your fees would not be tormented via this. it is actual that some parking zone injuries are 50/50 or each and each motive force can pay for their very very own damages, yet i think of it is if the two drivers are backing up on the comparable time or it relies upon on the way it take place. Ask your insurance business enterprise approximately this and for advice.

Answer 5

Tough question because generally, the person in the back is at fault because he 'could have had breaking time'. Even though she was backing up and slammed in to you, she can very easily say that you rammed in to her. That is,... she's probably going to lie. I wish I could say you would fare well in court, but it would not be worth your time or money after court fees, etc... You can only sue for actual damages (doesn't sound like you suffered any punitive damages). You are so far, only out your deductible, correct? Also, keep in mind that the insurance companies have staffed attorneys and if the judge decides against you, they could hold you responsible for their attorneys fees. And, believe me... THAT is where you are bound to lose a lot.
Cut your losses and just be out the deductible.
My best to you.

Answer 6

Not sure. but stick to your guns. If she saw you trying to go around her then she had enough time to stop. She should look for on coming traffic. You have the right of way. I would not settle for 50/50 if it was not partly your fault. And with her taking off your tail light then, you were quite a way almost past her. She will lose in court if pressed. Problem is, is the amount of damages worth going to court for. If you can get her to pay your court fees then maybe.

Answer 7

If you weren't moving and she hit you....she is at fault. Especially, if as you say, you were in a line waiting to exit the parking lot.

The only way I can see you being even partially at fault would be if you were blocking any area that was designated "keep this area clear" like they do sometimes so cars can't impede traffic flow.

But even then she should have seen you.

Call your insurance agent and tell them what happened. They should be able to advise you as to fault. But again, if you weren't moving, it's hard to imagine how you could be at fault.

Answer 8

She and her insurance company are thoroughly dishonest. What is she trying to claim, that you deserved to be hit because you were in her way? If she's claiming you were trying to get around her, she's admitting she knew you were there and still hit you. That's more or less an admission of guilt in my opinion. In the absence of other factors, whoever had the last opportunity to avoid the accident is to blame. She hit you, so it's her fault.

Answer 9

there mite have been cameras somewhere in the parking lot. go talk 2 some1 who works there and try 2 get a copy of the tape and bring it with you and then see what they have 2 say