would this be admitting liability?

[rml2345]

I think offering to polish it out without admitting liability is quite a nice thing to do. Without wishing to join the "Bellend" debate, odd bumps are sort of what bumpers are for. Sure you probably shouldn't have tried the space but then again the other chap should have been further over. No one is really going to win except the insurance company if he claims so offering to fix it for £free is pretty decent.

[dieselnutjob]

I don't even mind admitting liability if that liability is limited to the slight non shinyness in the lacquer of one tiny part of the bumper which I can see will easily polish out.

 

When he started talking about it being scratched and the bumper being pushed out of alignment, taking contact details and taking photos then I start to think about how to protect myself from liability of something I didn't do, and the onslaught of insurance companies, accident management companies and approved accident repair centres who will see an opportunity to make lots of money.

 

I am probably worrying too much.  If it was an ordinary person there would probably been an angry word and the end of it but as he was clearly a bellend he got me worried.

 

Some people on here seem to think that I deliberately banged into his car out of retribution or something, but I just wanted to get my rear tyres over the line so they wouldn't be on the single yellow and go get some beers from the off'i

 

If these people can honestly say that they have never, ever, even touched another cars bumper whilst getting into a tight space then I doff my hat to their driving skills, otherwise I think that John 8:7 applies.

[beko1987]

I did it to the missus when I first got the XM. She still doesnt know...

[Mr Lobster]

I did it to the missus when I first got the XM. She still doesnt know...

Yeh that rohypnol is pretty good shit isn't it.

 

But anyway, back to talking about minor parking incidents.

[Mr Livered]

I don't even mind admitting liability if that liability is limited to the slight non shinyness in the lacquer of one tiny part of the bumper which I can see will easily polish out.

 

When he started talking about it being scratched and the bumper being pushed out of alignment, taking contact details and taking photos then I start to think about how to protect myself from liability of something I didn't do, and the onslaught of insurance companies, accident management companies and approved accident repair centres who will see an opportunity to make lots of money.

 

I am probably worrying too much. If it was an ordinary person there would probably been an angry word and the end of it but as he was clearly a bellend he got me worried.

 

Some people on here seem to think that I deliberately banged into his car out of retribution or something, but I just wanted to get my rear tyres over the line so they wouldn't be on the single yellow and go get some beers from the off'i

 

If these people can honestly say that they have never, ever, even touched another cars bumper whilst getting into a tight space then I doff my hat to their driving skills, otherwise I think that John 8:7 applies.

Insofar as you attempted to fit into a space that turned out to be too small, and consequently you hit someone else's car, you are at fault and therefore In The Rong.

 

However, anyone who makes a fuss about a gentle kissing of bumpers is a prize wally who is patently undeserving of sympathy.

[seacow]

Is it not still the case that there is no liability in a car park so he can't claim against you?

[robinmasters]

I had some kind individual split the rear bumper on my mundano as well and fucked off without so much of an explanation.

 

 

DNJ is concerned about his insurance company having to fork out for a new bumper and £bumrape to fit and paint it. A couple of feet of duct tape is hardly comparable. 

[Mr Lobster]

Is it not still the case that there is no liability in a car park so he can't claim against you?

Nope.

[Guest Breadvan72]

Is it not still the case that there is no liability in a car park so he can't claim against you?

 

 

Fishcake, hatstand, wibble!  Where do people get this stuff from?  Is it OK to run people over in a car park?  How about custard pie attacks or crazed machete rampages?

 

"Still" the case?  That has never been the case.   Liability for doing careless stuff doesn't magically cease within the confines of a car park.

[Albert Ross]

If he was wearing a fluorescent yellow (other HiVis colours are available) tabard/jacket thing, it means you were instantly at fault, because he must have been visible, therefore invincible.

   Another modern phenomenon. I live and work in a mostly blue-collar town. The sheer amount of people I see on my commute, wearing these damn things, amazes me. (75%??) People stand out by NOT donning one, as opposed to being less visible without them....

[fordperv]

some cunt touch parked into the rear bumper of my saph that was perfectly parked at tesco causing a crack to appear from the number plate light and a mark on the face of the bumper then drove away (i only know because there was nothing behind when i came out and noticed the crack when i got home, id polished it earlier that day and the crack wasnt there then i only used it to go tesco after), i would happily stand on their face repeatedly for their inconsiderate act and fucking off its almost up there with the inconsiderate bastards who knowingly open their doors onto yours causing dinks, i just want to jump up and down on them and also in the middle of their roof it boils my piss

[robinmasters]

Is it not still the case that there is no liability in a car park so he can't claim against you?

 

There's no need to have insurance against third party liabilities in a private car park, but you're still liable if you drive into someone, you just have to pay them out of your own pocket.

[rml2345]

If he was wearing a fluorescent yellow (other HiVis colours are available) tabard/jacket thing, it means you were instantly at fault, because he must have been visible, therefore invincible.

   Another modern phenomenon. I live and work in a mostly blue-collar town. The sheer amount of people I see on my commute, wearing these damn things, amazes me. (75%??) People stand out by NOT donning one, as opposed to being less visible without them....

 

Completely unrelated to parking, but the last time I wore my "Hi-Viz" ex Royal Mail rain coat, I spent 20 minutes in the railway station being asked questions about trains and probably giving people the wrong information. Does "Hi-Viz" clothing automatically denote the presence of some sort of authority or was it just bad luck?

[Lankytim]

 

There's no need to have insurance against third party liabilities in a private car park, but you're still liable if you drive into someone, you just have to pay them out of your own pocket.

 

That used to be the case, but the law was changed a few years ago so that normal laws of the road are still enforced on private car parks. This was in response to cruisers having anti-social fun in B&Q car park and the rozzers having no powers to move them on or do them for no insurance, unroadworthy cars e.t.c.

 

Breadvan72 will probably be along in a bit to tell me i'm wrong and should be drowned in boiling oil but that's what I understand as a fully qualified internet barrister specialising in road traffic law. .

[robinmasters]

 

 

 

That used to be the case, but the law was changed a few years ago so that normal laws of the road are still enforced on private car parks. This was in response to cruisers having anti-social fun in B&Q car park and the rozzers having no powers to move them on or do them for no insurance, unroadworthy cars e.t.c.

 

Breadvan72 will probably be along in a bit to tell me i'm wrong and should be drowned in boiling oil but that's what I understand as a fully qualified internet barrister specialising in road traffic law. .

 

 

They changed the law by including the 'other public place' bit, and in general car parks outside big shops count as public places. I mentioned it to try and explain why people might think you don't have any liability in a car park. My internet lawyers are currently preparing a writ suing you for royalties in relation to you using the content of my post without permission, or something. 

 

I have a number of dents from having doors opened into my car when I've parked 5 microns away from someone who's taking up more than one space. Bastards. 

[dieselnutjob]

It wasn't a car park anyway.  It was nose to tail individually marked bays at the side of the road.

 

I understand that if someone hits your car so hard that it cracks the bumper and then buggers off that you would be annoyed, but that's not what I did.

[chaseracer]

Be advised: BV72 is REEL LORYER.  We are not.**

 

He knows of what he speaks.

 

 

 

 

** Acksherley, one of us is - I just can't remember who...

[Mr_Bo11ox]

Bread might be a real lawyer but that doesnt mean you can't disregard large quantities of what he says.

[chaseracer]

BV72 (for it is he): Good morning, Mr Bollox.  I'm your lawyer.

 

Testes: I don't believe you!

 

[explosive-cabbage]

I am going to throw in another situation here...

I was walking out of Morrisons, and a car came into collission with a heavy trolley being pushed by a woman, who was leaving the store also, crossing the car park but not on a 'crossing' or footway ( as none existed) The car's indicator was broken.

The driver immediately blamed the trolley pusher and went beserk.

Surely it was the responsibility of the driver in that situation to avoid a collision, therefore it is the driver's fault??

Answers below please

[dieselnutjob]

I think he might look a bit silly trying to make a claim off my insurance when I have already offered to fix it and he hasn't taken up the offer.

 

From today I have learned that if someone is selfish enough to take two spaces then they are probably also the type of person who will ruin my day if I lightly tap their bumper trying to get into what is left.

 

Next time I will find a traffic warden and report them.

[meshking]

I just assume that everyone is out to ruin my day on the road. Then I am pleasantly surprised when they don't. Living in Surrey, you can imagine that I am not pleasantly surprised very often.

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[EssDeeWon]

I am going to throw in another situation here...

I was walking out of Morrisons, and a car came into collission with a heavy trolley being pushed by a woman, who was leaving the store also, crossing the car park but not on a 'crossing' or footway ( as none existed) The car's indicator was broken.

The driver immediately blamed the trolley pusher and went beserk.

Surely it was the responsibility of the driver in that situation to avoid a collision, therefore it is the driver's fault??

Answers below please

 

All too often drivers do not look when reversing especially in busy car parks. I have seen un told times when people just start reversing and then look which is often too late, the number of times I have to sound my horn to make people aware I am there, FFS PPL USE YOUR MIRRORS PLEEAASSSEE!!! Especially in a busy car park with other cars and people and kids walking around.

 

In the above note from explosive the driver is probably at fault, IF he looked where he was going there would be no collision, I doubt the lady pushing the trolley intended to push it into his car!

[Cavcraft]

I am going to throw in another situation here...

I was walking out of Morrisons, and a car came into collission with a heavy trolley being pushed by a woman, who was leaving the store also, crossing the car park but not on a 'crossing' or footway ( as none existed) The car's indicator was broken.

The driver immediately blamed the trolley pusher and went beserk.

Surely it was the responsibility of the driver in that situation to avoid a collision, therefore it is the driver's fault??

Answers below please

 

 

You should have done your public duty and accidentally* pushed your trolley into his car, then gone off your tits about your eggs being broken or something.

[inconsistant]

I just assume that everyone is out to ruin my day on the road. Then I am pleasantly surprised when they don't. Living in Surrey, you can imagine that I am not pleasantly surprised very often.

 

Also my attitude. I live in Surrey* too.

 

*other counties/areas of land divided seemingly arbitrarily to facilitate governance are also available in which it might be appropriate to assume others don't care about me, my car, my bike or my child making it extra lovely when someone proves me wrong.

[RichardMoss]

He was stationary - you hit him. You are at fault. End of.

 

I had a case where my MG broke down whilst driving and the only place to stop was on double yellows. A vehicle hit me and despite its driver's protestations, the insurance companies took the view stated above - moving vehicle at fault.

[RichardMoss]

From today I have learned that if someone is selfish enough to take two spaces then they are probably also the type of person who will ruin my day if I lightly tap their bumper trying to get into what is left.

I wonder if you would be so relaxed if someone hit YOUR car (especially if it was a valuable "flash" car)?

[dieselnutjob]

that's easy to answer.  I can remember at least four occasions when there have been minor bumps and I took absolutely no action.

[dollywobbler]

That doesn't mean that others will be as carefree as you, to be fair.

 

Regarding the trolley incident, this sort of thing is only going to get worse as blind spots get every more enormous. There has to be some duty of care on pedestrians to look out for cars reversing as it's easier for a person outside a car to see it, than the person inside the car to see out. It's like keeping a very watchful eye on trucks at roundabouts, as you don't want to end up in his blind spot, or taking a bit of road the truck needs to clear the junction.

[eddyramrod]

All too often drivers do not look when reversing especially in busy car parks. I have seen un told times when people just start reversing and then look which is often too late,

 

If they're reversing out of a space into the traffic, they are at fault.  Especially if that traffic is me, in a RWD Volvo.

 

Am I the only person using the roads who remembers what he was taught to pass his UK driving test?  I was specifically and expensively taught to reverse into a limited opening (eg parking space, driveway) either to the right or to the left, away from the traffic.  That's the test element.  Is it so easy to forget?  I remember, and my test was 36 years ago.