Crashing into a stationary car. Who is to blame.

[Nobody You Know]

This has been a subject that has been playing on my mind for years now but have never been able to find a definitive answer so maybe the PH masses can sort it out.

Now in most cases if a car is stationary and a moving (obviously) car hits it, it is the moving cars fault....

..... But I understand there maybe some exceptions to the rule:

If the stationary car is parked facing the wrong way on the road i.e parked facing into oncoming traffic then it is the fault of the parked car. This is why legally cars have to have rear reflectors (so they can been seen when parked up at night with no lights on) - Is this true? Could it apply at night only?

If the stationary car is parked illegally i.e it is parked on Double Yellow or Red lines then it should not have been there so it is the stationary cars fault. - Is this true? And if so does it apply if the hazard lights are on (maybe the car has broken down of something)

If the stationary car has stopped on the motorway (which all have 'no stopping' restrictions) like these pillocks who stop and wait at the end of a slip road because they don't know how to filter. - Is this the stationary cars fault as it is illegal to stop? And again is this void if the car suffered a problem and had hazard lights on?

Are there any other times when the stationary car may be at fault.

The reason I ask is in my local town cars are often parked at the brow of the hill on the wrong side of the road facing oncomming traffic, when you are coming up the hill at night oncomming cars even with dipped headlights are dazzling you (as you are below them coming up a hill) and without any reflectors you cannot see the cars parked facing you on your side and many times I have seen cars almost smash head-on into them.

[Strangely Brown]

So, what have you driven into then?

[10 Pence Short]

A car being parked illegally has no bearing on fault if a moving vehicle crashes into it.

It is how safely it is parked that's important. Being parked illegally might demonstrate that it was obvious that the location was considered dangerous, however.

[hairykrishna]

I thought that it was always the fault of the moving car.

[Nobody You Know]

Strangely Brown said:

So, what have you driven into then?

Nothing, just wanted to know. Often I park my car near the wrong facing cars at the brow of the hill in local town (I'm always parked the correct way) but if someone did get punted into me during a crash I wondered who would be at fault and this set me off thinking about it.

Edited by Nobody You Know on Monday 26th January 11:27

[AbarthChris]

you should always drive so that you can stop in the event of the road being obstructed so if you crash into a parked car, regardless of how badly it is parked, you are a numpty and the PH masses will hound you. Forever

[wombat172a]

Nobody You Know said:

If the stationary car has stopped on the motorway (which all have 'no stopping' restrictions) like these pillocks who stop and wait at the end of a slip road because they don't know how to filter. - Is this the stationary cars fault as it is illegal to stop? And again is this void if the car suffered a problem and had hazard lights on?

Had this one where I was the moving vehicle, where a guy decided to stop in the fast lane due to a puncture. Went down to 50:50 blame.

[paulsm]

always the fault of the moving car, it doesnt matter how badly parked a car is you should always be able to stop in the distance you can see. If a car had stopped on the road, (for whatever reason) it may be stopped where there are double yellows or suchlike, you wouldnt be expected to just plow into the back of it

[hairykrishna]

AbarthChris said:

you should always drive so that you can stop in the event of the road being obstructed so if you crash into a parked car, regardless of how badly it is parked, you are a numpty and the PH masses will hound you. Forever

Who was the guy on here who crashed into a skip? I vaguely remember the piss-taking.

[Strangely Brown]

Nobody You Know said:

Strangely Brown said:

So, what have you driven into then?

Nothing, just wanted to know. Often I park my car near the wrong facing cars at the brow of the hill in local town (I'm always parked the correct way) but if someone did get punted into me during a crash I wondered who would be at fault and this set me off thinking about it.

The parking facing the wrong way at night is an offence. However, I think that anyone who hits a stationary object and then tries to avoid responsibility by blaming the inanimate object is just another example of the "blame someone else" culture insidious in this country.

Legally, I don't know the answer but I suspect it would always be the drivers' responsibility.

Edited by Strangely Brown on Monday 26th January 11:32

[14-7]

Nobody You Know said:

The reason I ask is in my local town cars are often parked at the brow of the hill on the wrong side of the road facing oncomming traffic, when you are coming up the hill at night oncomming cars even with dipped headlights are dazzling you (as you are below them coming up a hill) and without any reflectors you cannot see the cars parked facing you on your side and many times I have seen cars almost smash head-on into them.

I would suggest that if you know that cars park badly there you need to approach it with a bit more caution.

I would imagine that if the street was well lit and then the moving vehicle is at fault. Saying you couldn't see it because oncoming headlights dazzled you is not a good idea.

[AB]

hairykrishna said:

AbarthChris said:

you should always drive so that you can stop in the event of the road being obstructed so if you crash into a parked car, regardless of how badly it is parked, you are a numpty and the PH masses will hound you. Forever

Who was the guy on here who crashed into a skip? I vaguely remember the piss-taking.

I recall it being 'youhavemystapler' or something like that - although he was hounded out for being a weapons grade cocksucker. Nothing to do with crashing into a stationary object!

IIRC he crashed his 350z (which he thought was the best thing since the 335d (mapped))

[Nobody You Know]

14-7 said:

Nobody You Know said:

The reason I ask is in my local town cars are often parked at the brow of the hill on the wrong side of the road facing oncomming traffic, when you are coming up the hill at night oncomming cars even with dipped headlights are dazzling you (as you are below them coming up a hill) and without any reflectors you cannot see the cars parked facing you on your side and many times I have seen cars almost smash head-on into them.

I would suggest that if you know that cars park badly there you need to approach it with a bit more caution.

I would imagine that if the street was well lit and then the moving vehicle is at fault. Saying you couldn't see it because oncoming headlights dazzled you is not a good idea.

If you had read my comment you would know that it is not me that is having the problem, I have just noticed other people nearly crashing when I have been in the vicinity.

Does anyone on PH ever read anything anymore? It seems like people just skim read the title and a few lines and then just make the rest in there heads.

PistonHeads - missing the point matters

[10 Pence Short]

Just to add- There is a specific offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position which overrides the Highway Code mantra of being able to stop in the distance you see to be clear.

[Strangely Brown]

10 Pence Short said:

Just to add- There is a specific offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position which overrides the Highway Code mantra of being able to stop in the distance you see to be clear.

Does it? First I've ever heard of it. I understand the offence but not that it overrides anything. Where does it say that?

[Nobody You Know]

Strangely Brown said:

10 Pence Short said:

Just to add- There is a specific offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position which overrides the Highway Code mantra of being able to stop in the distance you see to be clear.

Does it? First I've ever heard of it. I understand the offence but not that it overrides anything. Where does it say that?

Mr 10 Pence I have been expecting you......... Sorry had to do that.

I almost commented about your incident where the bike could not stop intime before hitting your almost stationary car but did not feel it was my place. Was this something that had a bearing in your case?

Also thankyou for the prison diary, very sobbering reading and courageous of you to share it with an open audience.

[10 Pence Short]

Strangely Brown said:

10 Pence Short said:

Just to add- There is a specific offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position which overrides the Highway Code mantra of being able to stop in the distance you see to be clear.

Does it? First I've ever heard of it. I understand the offence but not that it overrides anything. Where does it say that?

The point being that someone has the duty to stop in the distance they see to be clear, but that is not a law (it is a good indication of careless driving, though).

If someone wilfully parks dangerously and leaves the road partially obstructed, that is an offence.

The test is against what you would expect of a careful and competent driver. If you were travelling at night on a rural road, well below the speed limit, and came around a blind bend to find a car parked on your side of the road facing the wrong way, causing you to collide with it, I'd be inclined to expect a prosecution of the parked driver rather than the driver who collided with them.

Edited by 10 Pence Short on Monday 26th January 11:48

[Chris_w666]

When I did it the Police blamed me.

I still maintain though that the oil on the road and the fact the twunt had stopped to answer his phone contributed to the incident.

[Deva Link]

10 Pence Short said:

Just to add- There is a specific offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position which overrides the Highway Code mantra of being able to stop in the distance you see to be clear.

Although it wasn't a stopped vehicle, a guy was killed around here when he pulled out a side road and was broadsided by a van doing an estimated 50MPH.
At the inquest, the Cheshire Police said the maximum visibilty at the junction was 35Metres, but no blame could be attached to the van driver as he was driving within the speed limit.

I also remember a case locally of someone leaving a broken down car on an unlit A road and it being hit and that went down as the fault of the person who left the car.

[10 Pence Short]

To be fair there aren't many black and white cases involving dangerous parking and accidents, so I would imagine the CPS look at both sides and go for the easiest prosecution.