My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CALIFORNIA
I apologize if this is wordy.
My daughter was backing into a parking spot that is perpendicular to a feeder lane in a parking lot. She was struck in the left rear lower bumper panel of her car, causing scraping and folding of the panel, with blue paint from the plate of the vehicle that hit her. That car sustained minimal damage to the plate area (I have not seen the car, this is the report I got from my daughter). She exchanged information and rushed into work, rather than taking time to evaluate the situation.
The feeder lane easily fits two cars traveling in opposite directions. She was traveling west, and pointed her car south to back into the space on the right of her lane of travel between another vehicle on the right and an open space on the left. She observed a Lexus SUV on the thoroughfare lane in the parking lot about 30-40 feet away, turning left into the feeder lane. This car appeared to be slowing as it turned, lending my daughter to feel "seen" parking. She put her car in reverse and began to back in, glancing at the parked car for reference and to prevent hitting it. The SUV struck her rear left bumper panel, scraping along the length from about an inch from the rear to the wheel well and slightly caving the rounded (wheel) part in. There is blue license plate paint smudged on her car, in two locations (about a foot apart, since the panel has a indented design) indicating my daughter was moving actively when she was struck T-bone style.
When she first told me, I advised she was a fault and would have to pay to repair her car and the lady's SUV. She was backing, after all. Once I showed up to see just how much room the lady had to react to my daughter's car being parked it is clear she would be able to avoid the collision. SUV driver claims she honked twice, my daughter didn't hear any honking but acknowledges her music was loud.
I think the other lady is at fault due to the distance between the cars at the start of the parking attempt, the scrape action clearly showing my daughter was in motion, and the amount of room the feeder lane has. This was avoidable in a few different ways.
I'd like to get honest feedback as to whether my daughter should be found at fault or not, given the above information. I tried to present it as unbiased as possible.
I apologize if this is wordy.
My daughter was backing into a parking spot that is perpendicular to a feeder lane in a parking lot. She was struck in the left rear lower bumper panel of her car, causing scraping and folding of the panel, with blue paint from the plate of the vehicle that hit her. That car sustained minimal damage to the plate area (I have not seen the car, this is the report I got from my daughter). She exchanged information and rushed into work, rather than taking time to evaluate the situation.
The feeder lane easily fits two cars traveling in opposite directions. She was traveling west, and pointed her car south to back into the space on the right of her lane of travel between another vehicle on the right and an open space on the left. She observed a Lexus SUV on the thoroughfare lane in the parking lot about 30-40 feet away, turning left into the feeder lane. This car appeared to be slowing as it turned, lending my daughter to feel "seen" parking. She put her car in reverse and began to back in, glancing at the parked car for reference and to prevent hitting it. The SUV struck her rear left bumper panel, scraping along the length from about an inch from the rear to the wheel well and slightly caving the rounded (wheel) part in. There is blue license plate paint smudged on her car, in two locations (about a foot apart, since the panel has a indented design) indicating my daughter was moving actively when she was struck T-bone style.
When she first told me, I advised she was a fault and would have to pay to repair her car and the lady's SUV. She was backing, after all. Once I showed up to see just how much room the lady had to react to my daughter's car being parked it is clear she would be able to avoid the collision. SUV driver claims she honked twice, my daughter didn't hear any honking but acknowledges her music was loud.
I think the other lady is at fault due to the distance between the cars at the start of the parking attempt, the scrape action clearly showing my daughter was in motion, and the amount of room the feeder lane has. This was avoidable in a few different ways.
I'd like to get honest feedback as to whether my daughter should be found at fault or not, given the above information. I tried to present it as unbiased as possible.
Determination of Fault: Backing into a Space, Someone T-Boned the Car
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire