Getting out of my car

[quincy]

If the car door was already open, the car pulling into the parking space is at fault for hitting it.

What if it had been a shopping cart or a kid next to lanunz's car? A car entering the parking space cannot just run into them.

 

[not2cleverRed]

This is not "oncoming traffic." It's cars parking.

I'm wondering if, by Zig's logic, it's not my fault if I don't look before parking and plow into/over a shopping cart at Target.

(I use Target as an example because at the local Target the "empty" spaces remotely close to the front door usually have a cart in them.)

 

[Zigner]

I'm wondering if, by Zig's logic, it's not my fault if I don't look before parking and plow into/over a shopping cart at Target.

Apples/Oranges. Let's look at it this way - you're pulling in to the spot and the person in the next spot doesn't look (or just doesn't see you) and pushes the cart right in to your (moving) car. Whose fault is it then?

 

[quincy]

Apples/Oranges. Let's look at it this way - you're pulling in to the spot and the person in the next spot doesn't look (or just doesn't see you) and pushes the cart right in to your (moving) car. Whose fault is it then?

That's not what happened, though. The inside hinge of the car door would not have been the point of Impact if the door wasn't already open when the other car pulled in.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Apples/Oranges. Let's look at it this way - you're pulling in to the spot and the person in the next spot doesn't look (or just doesn't see you) and pushes the cart right in to your (moving) car. Whose fault is it then?

No, you are comparing apples to oranges, stationary versus moving.

A stationary cart and a opened door is different from a moving cart and a opening door.

The door was opened, stationary.

 

[Zigner]

No, you are comparing apples to oranges, stationary versus moving.

A stationary cart and a opened door is different from a moving cart and a opening door.

The door was opened, stationary.

By THAT analogy, if you are driving on a street and a car darts out from a cross street and stops in front of you, you are at fault for hitting the car?

 

[lanunz]

No, you are comparing apples to oranges, stationary versus moving.

A stationary cart and a opened door is different from a moving cart and a opening door.

The door was opened, stationary.

Thank you all for your thoughts. My door was open and the other driver hit it when she pulled into the parking space. Simple as that. I didn't open the door into oncoming traffic. I opened my door into an empty parking space. She pulled into the space and crunched my door. I could certainly see being somewhat at fault if I haphazardly opened my door while someone was pulling into the space next to me. But that's not what happened. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[quincy]

By THAT analogy, if you are driving on a street and a car darts out from a cross street and stops in front of you, you are at fault for hitting the car?

That is not comparable.

 

[quincy]

Thank you all for your thoughts. My door was open and the other driver hit it when she pulled into the parking space. Simple as that. I didn't open the door into oncoming traffic. I opened my door into an empty parking space. She pulled into the space and crunched my door. I could certainly see being somewhat at fault if I haphazardly opened my door while someone was pulling into the space next to me. But that's not what happened. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

It appears to me that the other driver is at fault for pulling into a parking space without making sure there were no obstacles.

But it is in the hands of the insurers now so, regardless of what strangers on the internet might believe, the result of the insurance investigation is what will determine fault.

 

[Zigner]

It appears to me that the other driver is at fault for pulling into a parking space without making sure there were no obstacles.

There wasn't an obstacle until the OP threw open the door without looking.

But it is in the hands of the insurers now so, regardless of what strangers on the internet might believe, the result of the insurance investigation is what will determine fault.

Agreed.

 

[Zigner]

Thank you all for your thoughts. My door was open and the other driver hit it when she pulled into the parking space. Simple as that. I didn't open the door into oncoming traffic. I opened my door into an empty parking space. She pulled into the space and crunched my door. I could certainly see being somewhat at fault if I haphazardly opened my door while someone was pulling into the space next to me. But that's not what happened. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

To be fair, you don't know whether the other car was already entering the spot when you opened your door.

 

[quincy]

There wasn't an obstacle until the OP threw open the door without looking ...

But that is not the story that has been told.

 

[HighwayMan]

Really???

That seems to be the only question you asked, and the answer is "yes".

It's your word against the other driver's and based upon the damage, the assessment is that either one of you could be at fault. Without witnesses it's a "he said/she said" so you get to split fault. This happens all the time. Realistically, what do you expect any insurance company to do?? Pull out a crystal ball to see the truth?

I was involved in a collision last month where a driver made a right on red at an intersection. I was in the left-most of two lanes and she swung out wide and hit me - I had no place to go. She shouldn't have made the right turn since she had a duty to yield to traffic but guess what? She lied and said she had a green light. I was lucky - she DID admit to making a right turn into the left lane so she was found 70% at fault but I still had to shell out the 30% of the repair cost to my car. It sucks but there is nothing I can do about it.

 

[Zigner]

But that is not the story that has been told.

I agree. The story is being told in the most positive light (to the OP) possible, so I adjusted my interpretation to account for that. Yes, if the OP is actually telling the story exactly as it happened, then the OP likely has no actual fault, but I suspect the other party's story is different. In any case, as you pointed out, it'll ultimately be up to the insurance company or, if the OP (or the other driver) doesn't like that determination, the court.

 

[Zigner]

That seems to be the only question you asked, and the answer is "yes".

It's your word against the other driver's and based upon the damage, the assessment is that either one of you could be at fault. Without witnesses it's a "he said/she said" so you get to split fault. This happens all the time. Realistically, what do you expect any insurance company to do?? Pull out a crystal ball to see the truth?

I was involved in a collision last month where a driver made a right on red at an intersection. I was in the left-most of two lanes and she swung out wide and hit me - I had no place to go. She shouldn't have made the right turn since she had a duty to yield to traffic but guess what? She lied and said she had a green light. I was lucky - she DID admit to making a right turn into the left lane so she was found 70% at fault but I still had to shell out the 30% of the repair cost to my car. It sucks but there is nothing I can do about it.

That's what dash-cams are for After an accident I had in 2017 (in which I was lucky the guy told the truth to the cop on scene before lying to his insurance), I won't drive my cars without one.