Another thought i had was that both drivers were moving at the same time and neither had come to a complete stop,neither driver had completed their manuevers so again this is another reason why it would probably go down as a 50/50 claim
Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using AVForums mobile app
definitely looks like a knock for knock situation
you could argue one car stopped before the other but i don't think it would be enough to bias the outcome one way or another
i think you did the right thing by informing your insurance about the incident regardless if you were going to claim or not, at least they get your side of the event rather than hearing from the third party first . as far as your excess is concerned if the third party damage is considerably more than the cost of your excess it's a no brainer to go through the insurance, after all when it comes to the cars being repaired it's just a question of how much it's going to cost you
you have informed you insurance and decided to pay for your own repair i would leave the ball in their court so to speak and wait for their insurance to contact you
Knock for knock agreements ceased many years ago. It never meant 50/50 when they did exist.
50:50, both drivers should have been more observant.
If I had to blame someone more, I'd blame the Juke driver, for driving a Juke.And a red one at that.No taste.
I'd say White car as Red wasn't moving and stopped once they saw the hazard. Also white car had gone across both sides of road.
On the form it will say "what was you speed when collision happened" Red car will put zero.
I have little doubt that this should be settled 50/50. Both were reversing into the road with equal responsibility to do it safely. If I HAD to decide on one or the other, I would marginally say the Landrover. If the Juke hadn't had to wait for passing traffic, it would have been on the road first and looks further into the road at the collision point.
But this is far from an open and shut case. I really suggest both parties pay 50% and don't involve your insurance companies or the law.
When I say 50/50, I mean if your repair is £100 and hers is £600, you each pay £350. Offering to pay half the costs may save your insurance and neighbourliness!
The real lesson: reverse into and forward out of your drives.
Insurance is already involved, at least on the OP's side.
Interesting as both were clearly negligent... what if either car was a cyclist? Neither were aware of their surroundings enough considering the manoeuvre being pulled.
That said, the grey car was not in the path of the red, and had it been the red car may have stopped. However the impact was clearly the grey car contacting the red, something that if they were watching their rear which was still moving (so they should have been), they would have seen before impact.
Will be interesting to see if the insurer argues it, I think there is a case for it but likely too much work for either to want to do anything more than 50:50.
It's been a while  welcome back
Original question was: "Whose fault"? Answer 50 / 50.
The other driver can't ask you to pay her £672. You both should report the incident to your respective insurance companies who will almost certainly agree to split the costs between them 50/50 and won't even begin to apportion blame.
Both of you will have the incident recorded and both of you will see increased premiums at next renewal.
,