Crosswords1 min ago
Tesco Car Park
Is the one way system in Tesco Car Park's actually legal? There are no blue one way signs and no 'no entry signs, only arrows on the road.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by WMD. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No. My girlfriend had no option but to drive against the arrows as there was a Tesco delivery lorry blocking the exit. As she was heading towards the other exit an old woman reversed out of a parking bay without looking and hit the rear wing of my girlfriends car. The Old woman said it was my girlfriends fault for driving the wrong way but it's surely the old woman's fault for not looking before reversing out of the parking bay.
The road markings are only advisory and as N t G posted to help the flow of traffic There is no legal requirement to obey them.
However, the woman reversing without looking is in the wrong. What would have happened if it was a pedestrian walking "the wrong way?"
The Highway Code clearly states that when reversing make sure it is clear to do so. If not sure get another person to guide you out.
She was probably one of the many who either start reversing before looking or, relies on the very narrow field of vision of her interior mirror.
However, the woman reversing without looking is in the wrong. What would have happened if it was a pedestrian walking "the wrong way?"
The Highway Code clearly states that when reversing make sure it is clear to do so. If not sure get another person to guide you out.
She was probably one of the many who either start reversing before looking or, relies on the very narrow field of vision of her interior mirror.
As far as criminal law goes, it's not an offence, per se, to ignore directional signs on a supermarket car park but you can still be prosecuted for offences such as 'driving without due care and attention' on any land to which the public has free access (including private land such as supermarket car parks).
However, it seems that this is really a civil dispute. As Dilligaf states, there was a duty on the driver reversing to ensure that there were no pedestrians walking behind her car, so quite clearly, she has failed to exercise due care.
Equally, however, there's a duty on all drivers to exercise reasonable 'hazard perception' skills. That means that, when driving around a car park, drivers should always be watching for other drivers returning to their vehicles and/or their reversing lights coming on. This would be particularly true if the driver was going against the usual flow of traffic.
I would expect that the insurance companies would agree that both drivers were partly to blame for the accident and pay out accordingly.
Chris
However, it seems that this is really a civil dispute. As Dilligaf states, there was a duty on the driver reversing to ensure that there were no pedestrians walking behind her car, so quite clearly, she has failed to exercise due care.
Equally, however, there's a duty on all drivers to exercise reasonable 'hazard perception' skills. That means that, when driving around a car park, drivers should always be watching for other drivers returning to their vehicles and/or their reversing lights coming on. This would be particularly true if the driver was going against the usual flow of traffic.
I would expect that the insurance companies would agree that both drivers were partly to blame for the accident and pay out accordingly.
Chris
WMD,
From your details I am sure it is soley the old womans fault. I don't think she could argue about the directional thing and as said in effect she sounds like would have hit anythone regardless of direction. I don't agreen with Buenchico that both parties are partly to blame. I would advise your gf not to accept any responsibiltity for this.
I am assuiming your gf was taken by surprise and not the case that she would have seen the old lady starting to reverse and just kept going.
From your details I am sure it is soley the old womans fault. I don't think she could argue about the directional thing and as said in effect she sounds like would have hit anythone regardless of direction. I don't agreen with Buenchico that both parties are partly to blame. I would advise your gf not to accept any responsibiltity for this.
I am assuiming your gf was taken by surprise and not the case that she would have seen the old lady starting to reverse and just kept going.
Your insurance company will want to wash their hands of this - the accident happened on private land not on a public highway! If the old woman struck your gf's car - she is fault as she caused the accident- failure to drive with due care and attention - but not sure how enforcable it is on private land!
1 to 8 of 8
