Car accident - my fault - but witness disagrees.

[krylekathe1]

I had an accident this morning.

I was swinging into a car park, misjudged and hit the rear right hand corner ute tray with the left front of my car.

Totally my fault, as far as I am concerned.

Talked to the ute driver, who was lovely, exchanged details. No issues. He bent out the but of his ute tray I hit & said no worries, no damage to his car (like I said, he was really nice).

As I was walking back to my (pretty damaged) car, a man approached me & told me to photograph the ute as it wasn't parked within the parking lines, so therefore not my fault.

I had already taken photos.

But I'm pretty sure that's not true. I haven't rung the insurance company yet, as I'm pretty upset.

Does it make a difference as to if the other driver is illegally parked? Technically, I hit a stationary vehicle. Isn't it still my fault?

Anyone have any ideas?

[krylekathe1]

Photo of the other car. Tried to crop out any identifying information

[punch*drunk]

Insurance company would be the only ones to know for sure, but I tend to agree with you. The other car was stationary whether he was within the marked lines or not should be irrelevant.

[joz*garage]

both of your fault really

good that the bloke advised you to take a photo

and let god deal with it, i suspect your and his insurance companies will share costs on the damage

[harley_babes_hoard]

I would still say it's your fault. The other car was parked and you could have avoided parking there.

[krylekathe1]

True, I could have parked somewhere else, but there weren't many parks.  As you can see, the guy parking has parked in 4 spots (not uncommon in this car park - makes it difficult to partk there, so I rarely do.  But yes, I still hit the car, and take full responsibility for that.  Totally my error.

I have called the insurance company, and left them to deal with it.  They see, to think that he should be fined (by who?) for not parking within the lines, but no idea as to whether this will make a difference to who is at fault.

[***super_nova***]

My daughter once hit a car that was parked illegally in the no stopping area near intersection, and she certainly was liable for the damage.  The guy parked illegally was fined for parking in no stopping zone, but the damage to both cars was her responsibility.  If the ute was parked such a way that you could not fit, then you should not attempted to get there.  You hit him, you were behind the wheel, you are responsible for hitting stationary object.  Sorry, but I cannot believe that you would even try to blame the ute owner. 

[lyne-flyn]

---

@krylekathe wrote:

True, I could have parked somewhere else, but there weren't many parks.  As you can see, the guy parking has parked in 4 spots (not uncommon in this car park - makes it difficult to partk there, so I rarely do.  But yes, I still hit the car, and take full responsibility for that.  Totally my error.

I have called the insurance company, and left them to deal with it.  They see, to think that he should be fined (by who?) for not parking within the lines, but no idea as to whether this will make a difference to who is at fault.

---

My son and daughter in law both work for a well known insurance company and sorry to say you are totally to blame for the accident.

The other car was parked and therefore did nothing to cause the accident....it doesn't matter if he was badly parked or not unfortunately.

[krylekathe1]

I never said I wasn't to blame (did you read my post?).

I said, I took full responsibilty, and was approached by a witness who said I wasn't.  I was simply asking what other people thought, as  (please read my post), I clearly stated that since I hit a stationary car, I believed it was my fault.

It's up to the incurance company to sort out now.

[***super_nova***]

Yes, i read your post and it seemed to me that you are would have liked people here to tell you that you are not to blame.