hitting a dangerously parked car liability

[kennyGW]

Hello all I am hoping some can help with a question / debate I am having.

The other night a delivery drive parked his car in the middle of the road at night about 10.30 PM it was a dark night. He turned off his light and left to make his delivery.
As he was making his delivery a motorbike came the road could not see him in time to be able to avoid hitting back of car. Doing minor damage to the car his bike and himself.
As you can understand the motorbike rider was a bit unset about this. When the delivery drive came back to his car, he was asked for his insurance information by the motorbike rider. However, instead of stopping and giving his details he got in is and drove off at speed.

I am saying that the car driver parked dangerously as “reasonable man” could "reasonably foreseeable" that parking up in the middle of road at night with no lights on could lead to an accident.

Is this right?

How would a civil court view the above accident, when assigning liability?

Would the car drive be liable or the motorbike rider?

As the car drive failed to stop and give information in an accident when both damage vehicle and person injury happened. And did not report the accident to the police with 24 hours would his count against him the court?

[des8]

Failure to give details at the scene of an accident (or reporting to police within 24 hours)where injury or damage occurred is an offence which carries a maximum penalty of 6 months imprisonment.That is a separate criminal offence, and has no bearing on liability for causing an accident.

When you say he parked in the middle of the road please describe the sort of road (single or double carriageway?),
If double carriage way was he parked straddling the white line (if any) or do you mean he parked some distance from the kerb?
If so how far? (was there a kerb or grassy verge or just a hedge or wall?
Was the road lit by street lamps? or is it an unlit country road?
What was the speed limit on that particular stretch of road?
Where was the nearest junction?

[kennyGW]

Hi, it is a single carriageway residential road, with a 30 MPH speed limit.
I think off hand there is street lighting but all of them work.
As the road is a single carriageway residential road you have cars parked on both side of the road. If two cars park on opposite side of the road there is no room to get a 3rd car pasted. Most the time they park on one side of the road with a few on the other side meaning to have to slalom your way down the road.
The car was parked opposite another car, I think.
At any rate he was about 3 feet of the kerb, normal driving space from the kerb.
There is junction at least 30 meters up the road.

[des8]

So a lit residential single carriageway road with a 30 mph limit and at least 10 meters from nearest junction:
vehicles parked facing the direction of traffic flow do not need lights, BUT SHOULD BE PARKED CLOSE TO KERB (Highway Code which is advice not law!)

The driving test requires the examinee to park within 12 inches of the kerb, whilst the regulations state "as close as may be and parallel to the edge of the carriageway." (RVLR reg 24 (8) (a).

As it was a lit road in a residential area the rider might find it difficult to explain why he did not see a vehicle in front of him.
Presumably the car driver has not made a claim against the rider.
Is it the rider's intention to make an claim against his own insurers or does he want to pursue a private claim against the car driver?
If the latter he may find it difficult to prove the car driver was liable

[kennyGW]

Hi and thank you for the info.

I think he was facing direction of traffic so on the wrong side of the road.

As for the highway code, it has always been my understanding that parts of it are guidance parts of are law. With if it saying MUST or MUST NOT it is law. This what we where told at school by the police.

Rule 248
You MUST NOT park on a road at night facing against the direction of the traffic flow unless in a recognised parking space.

So, if he was parked facing oncoming traffic then his broken the law?

Rule 242

You MUST NOT leave your vehicle or trailer in a dangerous position or where it causes any unnecessary obstruction of the road.

So, if he was parked opposite a car, would he not then be blocking the road is that is breaking the law?

As I did not see the accident by only heard about from a witness, I could not say why he hit the car.
Maybe the lights where not working in that area, (I know there are a few in the road that I live have not worked for years)
Also, he could have been moving around other legal parked cars, or a mix of the both. So, he could have been picking his way around a number of cars in the road, so not having a clear view of the road ahead. It was dark and just did not see the car. I do know it was a low speed accident. Which would say the above it right.

Let’s say he was parked facing against the direction of traffic and obstructing the road as these are both against the law. Would that not act against him in court?

Or are you saying that as motorbike hit the back of parked car, in the eyes of the law any crime that has been committed by car drives would not count when it comes to sorting out liability.

Been talking this over with friends we coming down half and half who it to blame.

[charitynjw]

I'll add my six penn'orth.

Why did the car driver speed off?
Was the vehicle (&/or driver) 'legal'?

[des8]

If the car was parked on the wrong side of the road, without lights and out from the kerb, IMO the courts would consider that as contributory negligence as the driver had not acted prudently. It would not automatically mean the driver was 100% liable.
If the driver was convicted of a criminal offence it would help a civil claim in that those facts were already proven, but it does not necessarily follow that a criminal act proves civil liability
The rider should have been travelling in such a manner and speed that he should have seen in time to stop or avoid any stationary obstruction.
His own lights should have picked up the car (presumably it was equipped with reflectors) in time for him to stop.


Other than chatting to mates, is the rider considering initiating a claim against the car driver?
Was the accident reported to the police by the rider?

[kennyGW]

My friend gave his details to the rider and the he said he report it the cops but he heard nothing at all. Time will let.
I know years ago I got it but bus reported it and the cops would not even give me an incident number as do damage was done to my car!
I can tell you as car driver and push biker rider lights do not always pic things up you think they would, when it comes to moving around parked cars. I know it sound odd but a car park where it should not be can see late. There was a study done on people not see things that are out of place when concentrating on other things. But that a side point.

You got to love the law, so you can be found criminal offence i.e. dangerous parking or the like. But not be found liable if an accident happens, where the burned of prof if lower.

Thank you for helping to answer my questions on this.

[des8]

Your friend was a witness and the bike rider said he would report to police?

I am well aware as a road user of many years on varied means of transport (push bike/scooter/ m'cycle/car/coach and on one occasion a tank!) that driving at night can have challenges.

However it is for the road user to drive/ride within the limits of his vision, and it is possible that in a civil court the judge will find, regardless of the faults of the car driver, that the motor cyclist was at least partially to blame for the accident and reduce any award in proportion.