It's simple, don't reverse onto the highway....simples
I do wonder whether there was an element of trying it on from the neighbour. If she thought the OP wanted to keep it out of the hands of his insurers she might have that he would do so "at any cost" and stump up for her repairs rather than have her report it.Without realising he was more than happy to inform his insurers, just not go through them as his repair was less than his excess.
As the OP posted on here to find a cheaper alternative than a dealer or bodyshop repairer, the neighbour has probably sought one quote from the most expensive service on the premise that the OP would stump up in full.
in my opinion, an unfortunate knock for knock and each to pay their own damages
From an insurance perspective the former "knock for knock" agreement was abandoned decades ago.
As both vehicles were reversing at the same time then the case would be dealt with by insurers as a 50/50 split liability. Who happens to get their wheels on the main highway first is irrelevant as neither were established nor correctly proceeding at the time.
Under knock for knock each party carries there own losses. Under 50/50 each party reimbuses half of the other sides losses. In a minor fender bender the two can come out fairly similarly but if one party is injured and the other isnt or one has an old banger and the new dent just matches an old one whereas the other vehicle is a prestigue lease vehicle and so no option but repair then 50/50 is clearly a fairer solution.
If I were in the red car, I'd want the white car owner to pay for the damage as the red car was stationary when it was hit.
However as soon as a quote near/over £500 is in play it's just about always going to go to insurance from the other person.
If I were in the white car I'd go through insurance as they would likely resolve 50/50 and we already know the red car costs are greater than the excess.
Starting to agree that it may be white cars fault.. but will be surprised if insurers agree..
It’s not a white car, it’s dark grey!!
Yes she was stationary, but apparently being stationary for a second before the incident doesn’t actually constitute being stationary. If she’d been sat on her drive and reversed into, then yes. But she was reversing up until a brief second before impact (I’d imagine she wasn’t looking in her mirror, then suddenly did so and thought “Oh ****!”), so she should have been just as aware of what was around her as the other driver.
Yes the red car costs are probably greater then her excess, but I’d imagine to get the dent on the Disco fixed correctly back to showroom condition would also cost more than the £350 excess.
As the drives are offset, if the red car had not stopped it would be going away from the dark grey car.It would not be possible for the red car to reverse into the grey car coming out of the drive in the same manner when going in the same direction.The person in the red car would have been looking at where they were reversing and not sideways towards the direction they would be heading afterwards.No doubt they became aware of the grey one coming at them and stopped themselves, but the red car could not stop the accident from happening, only the grey car could.
The grey car reversed and hit the red one on the wrong side of the road.
100% dark grey cars fault.If they get 50/50 they should thank their lucky stars that insurance claims aren't my thing!
They were both reversing into the same space on the correct side of the road  grey car had reversed out onto the side of the road their drive is on, they would have been facing the wrong way, ie on the wrong side of the road.