Who's at fault?

[Justin8649]

The other night on IRC I brought up this subject and it resulted in a fun chat, so I figured I would make a thread about it.

Here is the scenario:

Driver A is parked in a parking spot with her rear passenger door open beyond the parking line. She is standing on the driver's side of the car.

Driver B is parked on the passenger side of Driver A's car.

Driver B backs out of the spot and hits the immobile door.

Who do you think is at fault?

 

[chaos]

I'd say Driver B was at fault. Is the door impossible to see? What if the door was a person? What door DOESN'T go beyond the parking line?

 

[junior]

Both were at fault.

However, think Driver A was at fault simply as it isn't anyone's job other than the owner to take care of the car. It was his/her fault for leaving it over his or her's parking space. It's not Driver B's responsibility to have to check for doors every single time the park, right?

Driver B is also to blamed as for what chaos listed.

 

[Justin8649]

It isn't Driver B's responsibility to check for doors every single time they park? Are you kidding me? When you drive you have to be 100% aware of your surroundings. Just because something shouldn't be there doesn't make it ok to hit it. Hey guys check it out, the pope is all up in my parking spot. He shouldn't be here. Let me run him over.

 

[GreenPikachu]

100% driver b's fault. there's no way you can be THAT unaware of what's going on.

 

[havoc]

I originally thought driver A would be at fault, but Justin's logic once again converted me. You should always be on the lookout for things you might hit. Ask the person to close their door or something geez !@

 

[DM]

The moving driver is always at fault in these situations. In a parking lot, it is supremely likely that a car can have an open door, regardless of where the owner is. As the operator of a moving vehicle, you have to take into account every single thing that surrounds you, and drive accordingly. Driver B's insurance is covering that door, no doubt about it.

Here's a better scenario (my own experience): Driver A is moving in reverse through a parking lot between two rows of cars. Driver B is pulling out of his parking spot in the line of cars on Driver A's driver side. Niether see each other, and they strike.

Who is at fault?

 

[Lorak]

If you live in the US, the auto manufacturer, who you subsequently sue for your own driving negligence, be you A or B. In my opinion, A, because you should be looking where you're going even more carefully when in reverse.

 

[Mekkah]

In both situations, both of them need to watch the hell out, though in the first situation driver B is moving so he should be even more aware.

 

[Carl]

Yeah it's totally driver B that's at fault in the OP. You always have to pay attention when you're driving and make sure nothing is around you so you can back up/whatever safely.

 

[DM]

If you live in the US, the auto manufacturer, who you subsequently sue for your own driving negligence, be you A or B. In my opinion, A, because you should be looking where you're going even more carefully when in reverse.

Wouldn't that also apply to Driver B pulling in reverse out of the parking spot?

 

[makiri]

Driver B is at fault for not being aware of his surroundings, but both are idiots, Driver B should have seen the door and Driver A shouldn't have a door wide open if they aren't on the same side and currently using the door.

 

[Lorak]

Wouldn't that also apply to Driver B pulling in reverse out of the parking spot?

B isn't reversing, I thought.

EDIT: I reread it. Is this what's going on 1 or 2? It's 1, right?

 

[rbygsc kid 251]

In the original post, it is Driver B's fault 100 percent unfortunetly. It has been said countless times, you must be aware of everything when you are driving. The same would apply if you were driving beside a line of parked cars, and all of a sudden someone opened their door and you destroyed it, this would be the moving vehicles fault again.

For the second situation, this seems like it would be a 50/50 split, in which both drivers would agree to pay for their own damages. In a situation like this it seems that at most, a couple of tail lights would be broken. It would be pointless to start a huge arguement over it, and if a cop is not around, they should definilty just call it even and move on with their lives, because as it was mentioned they are both equal in idioticy.

EDIT: Also, another reason that calling it even is a positive, is because insurance companies (the biggest thieves on the planet) won't get involved.

 

[jrrrrrrr]

Driver B is at fault for not being aware of his surroundings, but both are idiots

Luckily I decided to read the whole thread before posting since this is exactly what I was going to say. There is no excuse to hit something like that, especially in a parking lot where you should be more careful anyways because of heavy pedestrian traffic. What if that door was a person? What if the door was open because someone was getting out of the car? Driver B should consider themselves lucky that they just hit the door and nothing else.

 

[DM]

B isn't reversing, I thought.

EDIT: I reread it. Is this what's going on 1 or 2? It's 1, right?

It's 1, except you have the B in a spot on the passenger side of A instead of the driver side. It makes a big difference, and yes both are reversing.

 

[Lorak]

It's 1, except you have the B in a spot on the passenger side of A instead of the driver side. It makes a big difference, and yes both are reversing.

Then it's A's fault for being on the wrong side of the road?

 

[Justin8649]

Your scenario is kinda funny DM. That is just like...bad luck. But I don't really know why somebody would be going in reverse like that. So I'd be more inclined to take the side of the person backing out of the spot.

 

[Edge Of Pain]

Definitely driver A. Who is stupid enough to leave their door open? It is a hazard, not only to other drivers, but to herself, it may get hot wired and stolen by some petty thug... I really do not blame driver B because who would expect a door sticking out while reversing? Also (@Chaos), No one would stand close to or behind a reversing car, but I do see your point. So maybe both drivers are to blame. I am thinking more of driver A though. If it was not for driver A, the whole scenario would not have started, which is a reply to this:

Luckily I decided to read the whole thread before posting since this is exactly what I was going to say. There is no excuse to hit something like that, especially in a parking lot where you should be more careful anyways because of heavy pedestrian traffic. What if that door was a person? What if the door was open because someone was getting out of the car? Driver B should consider themselves lucky that they just hit the door and nothing else.

If you look at both sides of the argument, both drivers are 100% to blame.

 

[Justin8649]

Definitely driver A. Who is stupid enough to leave their door open?

You have never left your door open for more than 20 seconds?

It is a hazard, not only to other drivers, but to herself, it may get hot wired and stolen by some petty thug...

Really? A thug is just waiting for a person to open their door so they can go hot wire the car or steal it? She was standing right by her car...I guess we better figure out a way to avoid opening car doors...that is just BEGGING thugs to steal your car!

I really do not blame driver B because who would expect a door sticking out while reversing?

It is a parking lot. Somebody could be strolling a cart behind your car. Somebody could be getting out of their car. Could you imagine some dumbass getting out of their car? Maybe you shouldn't back up if a door is open.

Also (@Chaos), No one would stand close to or behind a reversing car,

Again, it is a parking lot. People walk to and from their cars quite often. You can't just reverse at free will.

but I do see your point. So maybe both drivers are to blame. I am thinking more of driver A though. If it was not for driver A, the whole scenario would not have started, which is a reply to this

The whole scenario would not have been started if Driver B didn't hit an immobile object.

 

[Edge Of Pain]

You have never left your door open for more than 20 seconds?



Really? A thug is just waiting for a person to open their door so they can go hot wire the car or steal it? She was standing right by her car...I guess we better figure out a way to avoid opening car doors...that is just BEGGING thugs to steal your car!



It is a parking lot. Somebody could be strolling a cart behind your car. Somebody could be getting out of their car. Could you imagine some dumbass getting out of their car? Maybe you shouldn't back up if a door is open.



Again, it is a parking lot. People walk to and from their cars quite often. You can't just reverse at free will.



The whole scenario would not have been started if Driver B didn't hit an immobile object.

WAIT WAIT WAIT! What do you mean by open? Do you mean:
1. open and leave the car, or:
2. open long enough to get out, and close the door?

If 1, then I do not suppose ANYONE IN THE WORLD would have the urge to steal the car if the driver walked off with the door open AT ALL. Nope, no way.


"The whole scenario would not have been started if Driver B didn't hit an immobile object."

But the immobile object has to be there for the driver to hit it.

 

[DM]

But the immobile object has to be there for the driver to hit it.

Yeah, good point. Next time I'm parking my car on the street in front of my house and I smash the car in front of mine, I'm blaming the other guy.

 

[Elbow Cancer]

In both of the scenarios, one could argue that all drivers involved had some sort of fault. However, when it comes down to law, or the insurance company, someone has to eat shit in these scenarios. This is the REAL question of who's at fault, rather than finding fault in laymen definition. (Though I'd have to go with what I know according to Californian law.)

In the first, Driver B is at fault. Whoever is in the moving vehicle has the responsibility placed on him or her to watch for objects they could collide with. It will also not help Driver B's case that he is in reverse, which is a huge blow against him/her when finding fault. Yes, Driver A could be immensely negligent or stupid for leaving the door open, but the blame will be placed on B's shoulders.

In the second scenario, with one driver driving in reverse in between rows of cars (A) and another driver coming out of a parking spot (B), B is considered more at fault, even if A was driving reverse the wrong way, in case this scenario depicted slanted parking spots. The reasoning for this is that B is merging into the larger flow of traffic, and the burden is placed on B to not hit anything while doing so. There is less responsibility put on A in this case because A is driving in the "main" flow of traffic.

 

[Syberia]

It would seem to me that the person in the car that's actually moving would be at fault. It's not like person A deliberately opened their door with the intent to hit driver B.

This is also why I hate parking lots. With a passion. No one knows how to drive correctly in them.

 

[Dark Arches]

Here's a better scenario (my own experience): Driver A is moving in reverse through a parking lot between two rows of cars. Driver B is pulling out of his parking spot in the line of cars on Driver A's driver side. Niether see each other, and they strike.

Who is at fault?

Driver B is at fault. A was already moving, and B was pulling out of a stationary position, and therefore had the responsibility to make sure it's clear before moving out.