so a car is going to reverse out of a drive

[rozia]

on a busy main road, and someone backs into it, who is to blame? She told the police her kids were all in the car and were wearing seatbelts, when only one child was in the car with no seat belt on (he told me himself). No car seat either, child is 9 years old, she wants to make a whiplash claim, and i think this is morally wrong, as she isn't hurt and the car isn't damaged, and why claim on people that are not in the car. Surely there must be a law against that, also the old couple that backed into her were in shock, ambulances had arrived.

[annadomino]

Pretty sure its illegal to back onto a main road.

[bundleone]

Regardless of who was in the car I would think the one backing out of the drive was responsible, should make sure the road was clear before moving out.

[Postdog]

I would be concerned about the other car going backwards on a main road though....

[rozia]

i thought so, i got told off backing into a main road a cop gave me way in a unmarked car and then pulled me over and gave me a ticking off, i never did it again!!! i told her not to do this, but she has manic depression and doesn't listen to anyone, just really feel for the kids....accident happened at 6.30 and she was discussing whiplash claim at 7.30, and asking a bloke she knows to be a false witness, he happened to turn up when it had already happened....so didn't witness a thing, but he agreed to do it. It makes my blood boil.

[Maydup]

How did the old couple back into her exactly?

Agree she shouldn't be backing out of her drive.

[Buenchico]

Lawyers could argue over such cases for hours (or, more likely, weeks!).

However, while the Highway Code isn't a statement of the law, it can be used as a guide by courts when assessing whether someone was driving responsibly. Rule 201 states "Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can."

The woman who was reversing out of the drive was clearly at fault for putting herself into a position where it was necessary to do so. (She should have reversed in). Once she'd got herself into such a position, she should have been checking BOTH directions for traffic crossing her path (where 'traffic' includes, for example, pedestrians and kids on their bikes).

The driver who was reversing along the road should also have been watching for vehicles pulling out of driveways (irrespective of whether they were reversing or not) but he/she certainly wasn't wholly at fault.

Further, a claim for non-existent whiplash injuries is an offence under the Fraud Act 2006, carrying a potential penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment.

Chris

[rozia]

Postdog, a car shouldn't reverse out onto the main road, unless its really clear, she was fine and so was her 9 year old..the old couple on the other hand had ambulance attending to them, the man had heart pains and woman was in shock.

[exdc]

https://www.insurancefraudbureau.org/

https://www.insurancefraudbureau.org/report/

[micmak]

Am I a bit slow here, you said "someone backs in to her" How can this be if she was reversing into a main road?

[rozia]

she backed out pretty fast, and the old couple were driving up, and backed into her, or she into them, very hard to tell, as she claims they hit her, and she was already on the highway.

[rozia]

i think she reversed into them, as they were behind her she said they backed into her....

[Captin Kirk]

Just a thought but considering how difficult and dangerouus it can be backing out of a drive, how dangerous would it be to stop on the main road and reverse onto the drive to park?

[Ellipsis]

Help me picture this better ...

Were the old couple reversing?
Where was the old couple's car hit?
Were the old couple driving on the same side of the road as the drive, or the opposite side of the road?

[EDDIE51]

Still not clear, was the other car (the old couple) going forward ? if so how could it have reversed into her ? Or were they both reversing ? I have no clear idea of what is supposed to have happened . Can you be clearer, please ?

[rozia]

old couple were driving up the main road, and she was reversing out of her drive from the opposite side, she reversed into the lane the couple were driving in and went into them, couples front bumper fell off and her car was ok, just a few scratches

[rozia]

they were driving on the opposite side of the road from the drive.

[EDDIE51]

So she reversed into the old couple who were driving forward correctly and now she is claiming whip lash for herself and children who were not even in the car ? I am sure the ambulance crew have a very good idea what happened and the police are no fools, does the ' false witness ' know about the penalties for Perjury ?

[twix123]

Jack Straw is sponsoring a Bill through through Parliament, although it probably won't get its 3rd reading before Parliament rises and will therefore fall. One clause included is that no one will be able to claim for whiplash injuries for collisions under 15 mph.

If this woman claimed that the other couple reversed into her car, how come she took off their front bumper?

[Buenchico]

Oh. Now we've established that the other vehicle was on the opposite side of the road, travelling forwards, there's absolutely no doubt that the woman reversing out of her drive was totally responsible for the accident.

Hopefully:
(a) the couple in the car will sue her (through her insurers) for their distress and injury ; and
(b) the police will pass the matter to the CPS for a prosecution for driving without due care and attention.

[ummmm]

It won't get far...they do investigate these things.