Hi! Would you please help me analyze the following situation.
My wife’s been in a small accident on our underground parking and unfortunately no one called the police: my wife did not know it was recommended, there was no network under the ground, there was a baby in the car as another stress factor, and overall rationally they’d block an entry to a large parking entirely if both cars stayed were they were. As a result, drivers only exchanged details, opinions, made photos etc.
Now, we have a disagreement with the other car driver as for whose fault was that.
My questions to you are,
how would you evaluate this situation, in whose favour? maybe my wife isn’t right?
how our insurances to which each of us has reported the situation in his favour, resolve it? do they have enough motivation/resources to establish the truth?
We tried to call the police post accident to ask them to try to collect a recording from the parking but they refused since they weren’t on the site when it happened.
without a proper police/witness evidence except for our photos, who has better chances? is there anything else we could do?
Now let me to describe the situation in more detail.
There’re 2 gated lanes entering the parking: left and right. Both merge into the right one. The right one however has triangles painted on the road indicating “give a way”.
My wife is near the gate on the right lane, she scans her badges and enters, while the other driver is looking for something in her car.
The police won’t be interested because nobody was hurt and it’s probably just a dent.
Talk to your car insurance. Also, perhaps the building administration has precise logs of when the barriers got raised so also see if you can get those.
With that said, your sketch shows that the other car hit your rear “corner” in a situation where everybody needs to move very slowly. In such a situation I’d expect the green car to be pretty much always be at fault. Even if for no other rason, talk to your car insurance because of this.
Thanks, we did tell our side of the story (ours is the red car of course) to the insurance but at this point it’s a word against a word, and I guess the parking won’t give recordings to anyone. As for logs, it’s a good idea, I’ll try.
I mean, logically, if the red car is a few seconds ahead, and has enough time to pass triangles, and only then gets a hit into its wheel/corner, how can it be still too fast to disrespect the triangles (trying to wrap my head around it). But unfortunately I wasn’t there to tell for sure…
I am just afraid the other car driver will have a more convincing explanation.
And in general, how two insurances between each other can negotiate as who is liable?
If the front of the other car hit your car then they are at fault.
You are supposed to drive so that you can always stop before hitting anything what if a pedestrian had run in front of them.
Plus you should give priority to other vehicles coming from the right and before changing lanes you must ensure the other lane is clear.
Triangles are not stop signs.
According to your drawing and the location of your damage your wife was past them anyway.
Are there any photos?
If the front of your car had hit the other one then the triangles would be a problem.
There are photos but unfortunately not immediately on site but afterwards when parked elsewhere, of the damage. For us it’s literally almost nothing, for the other driver as their car was not as tall and hitting us it is more substantial damage.
Whatever the rights and wrongs you are not allowed to ram other cars if you believe they disobeyed a traffic rule.
Clearly, from the location of the damage, they had plenty of time to stop or turn away and avoid the accident.
Yeah the car in the back is at fault.
No discussion, and triangles have nothing to do with it.
I wouldn’t let my insurance pay for anything and I would not admit responsibility under any circumstances, why should the not offending party have to split anything and bear an increase in premiums down the road?
Why? The accident happened a good piece after the end of that line. And as the car on the right is supposed to change to the lane on the left (from our point of view, not the driving point of view) I’m 100% sure there is no solid line there
Still, the car on the ‘no right of way’ lane was obviously and clearly in view of and almost past the one who hit the left back side of the other is in the wrong.
As somebody already mentioned: To force right of way is illegal.
I was in a bump in the underground garage with a neighbour years ago. She reversed into me. She flat out lied to the insurance. It was her word against mine so the best I could get was we both paid for our own damage. Cost me my 1000chf excess. Good luck.
Let me also get into this topic, but I would start with a question : since both of the cars were not on a public road, but on a private property … do normal traffic rules apply here ? I remember having a chat with someone a couple of years ago, in my home country (Romania) → that if you have a situation like this, it would be tricky with the police (since it’s not a public road) and similar with the insurance companies … also, again not in Switzerland, if there are no witnesses and no one is hurt / and people argue on some aspect, basically my word vs yours / they [the police] can decide to give a common fault → meaning each driver fixes their car out of their own pocket / their insurance … do not know if this applies here or not
There’s no line drawn on the concrete road in fact, only the section up until triangles has a tall concrete border sort of thing matching a length of a car with an extra buffer.
I’m mostly getting an evaluation in favour of my wife’s car but I’ve also spoken to an ex-colleague and and in his opinion it’s still my wife’s fault unfortunately: in his view due to triangles she would formally need to wait on this spot until the car entering behind her fully reaches the merge point of the left lane merging into the right lane; I find it a bit absurd as it’d also imply that if I put this situation to an extreme and assume there’s an aggressive driver coming from nowhere to the gate, badging himself and having enough time to hit my wife’s car, he’s still considered not guilty. Another point is that by this parking rules the speed limit is 10kmh so if my wife’s car deviated a bit from the gates and triangles, it shouldn’t be so probable for another car to reach and hit her without speeding but here it’s a matter of exact measurement which I cannot do, just speculating and I am not being objective of course.
Now we get to the bit where drawings no longer work. You keep calling the other one an aggressive driver but maybe it was your wife who thought “ah, I can slip through if I step on it now” It’s amazing how many people do that at parkhouse-gates although there is nothing to gain. The other thing is that although the triangles as you like to call them do not say one must stop, they still mean you don’t have way. So if the other one is that close, yes one has to stop and give way.
And: If he was able to hit her, she didn’t give way. And even if he hit her at the back side she should have known she would not get out in time.
So yes, your ex-colleague is right: A judge would probably find the guilt with your wife. I would.
Btw. insurances usually sort such things out amongst themselves. And the premium does not rise after the first accident either.
You’re supposed to give way, when the other is close to the intersection and you don’t stop their momentum.
If I arrive at an intersection with no right of way, and the other car is stationary or too far away, I will enter it; it’s not logical to just wait until the road is clear of any traffic to go. Then nobody would move in rush hour.
This is even more important in a parking garage; the triangles are there to show priority when two cars arrive together. If one is sitting and then remembers “I have to go” like a business class flyer skipping the line at the gate, they can’t blame the other car that is already at the point and has probably moved on.
I think any camera footage would clear the situation, and given it’s close to the gates, it’s highly likely there is one there. If your wife started first and was clearly ahead and could merge without issue, she would easily be cleared I think. If on the other hand your wife started with launch control and tried to jump the other car, things might not be so clear cut.
And for the record, the first accident does not increase premiums in the current contract, if there is premium protection coverage for which there is an extra charge. While most people have it, it’s not in by default. Also, the claim has to be reported when you’re looking for insurance again (buying another vehicle or chainging insurers for the current one).
