Anonymous wrote:This is where front and rear dash cameras become invaluable.

Depends. Witnesses are even better.

Anonymous wrote:One way street with parking on both sides. Car A stops to parallel park in a space, backing into the space. Car B (coming from behind Car A, obviously), tries to pass while Car A is still backing into the space and the two cars collide. Who is at fault?

(I am neither car)

Depends on several factors, including jurisdiction (where did the accident happen), who was where (which car was where at time of accident/placement of vehicles), where is damage located (point of impact)? Probably the person going into the space - you need to watch for other cars!

This is where front and rear dash cameras become invaluable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Car A.

Because only the worst kind of A-hole attempts to parallel park knowing there are cars coming behind them.

That's not how it works.

Seriously, PP are you suggesting that if there is a car behind you then you should NOT be allowed to parallel park??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say Car A, especially if they didn't signal. I get that B may have been impatient, but if it takes too long to parallel park in that spot, then that spot is not for you.

And when you parallel park, you still have to be aware of moving vehicles around you. Your attention should not be laser focused on parallel parking - you must multitask your awareness.

But we don't know that Car A was taking too long. Car A might have been quite efficient, but Car B attempted to pass before they were done. And I don't see what Car A could do. Stopping mid-parking doesn't get them out of the lane.

Stopping mid park early on when they see Car B is not stopping and is instead approaching might get Car B to stop passing...it's possible Car B made an incorrect calculation on the speed at which Car A was parking--perhaps Car A WAS an efficient parallel parker and Car B figured Car A would be out of the lane space enough by the time Car B got there, but for some reason Car A slowed down a bit and thus, an impact. If Car A had paid attention to the cars around them (which they should be, when parking) they could have seen that there was someone coming up behind them too fast for their liking and they needed to act defensively in some way.

Car B is still wrong, but just trying to come up with a logical explanation.

Anonymous wrote:Car A.

Because only the worst kind of A-hole attempts to parallel park knowing there are cars coming behind them.

That's not how it works.

Anonymous wrote:Technically both, but I'd say car B

+1

Car B. You said car B tried to pass, thus car B knew about car A's parallel parking, and it's likely that car B hit car A on the car A's driver side as car A was at 45 degree trying to parallel park.

Anonymous wrote:I would say Car A, especially if they didn't signal. I get that B may have been impatient, but if it takes too long to parallel park in that spot, then that spot is not for you.

And when you parallel park, you still have to be aware of moving vehicles around you. Your attention should not be laser focused on parallel parking - you must multitask your awareness.

But we don't know that Car A was taking too long. Car A might have been quite efficient, but Car B attempted to pass before they were done. And I don't see what Car A could do. Stopping mid-parking doesn't get them out of the lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was Car A signaling?

This, if Car A was signaling, which they should be, they should have just totally stopped when they saw Car B was not giving them room to park. Once Car B got around Car A, then Car A could finish parking. If Car A just said screw it and kept parking without even pausing, then Car A was engaging in a game of chicken. I'm not sure they're actually in the wrong, though. Generally, the car in front of you has the right of way, even if you disagree with what they are doing.

But if Car A stopped in the middle of parallel parking, they'd still be sticking out into the lane, and Car B would still have hit them. I think it was that Car B was unwilling to wait and just went around, when there wasn't actually room in the lane.

I think that Car A has the right of way, because they are in front and still in the lane. Car B didn't rear-end Car A, it sounds like it scraped the side. So Car B attempted to use the lane that Car A had right of way in, and would therefore be at fault.

Anonymous wrote:Was Car A signaling?

This, if Car A was signaling, which they should be, they should have just totally stopped when they saw Car B was not giving them room to park. Once Car B got around Car A, then Car A could finish parking. If Car A just said screw it and kept parking without even pausing, then Car A was engaging in a game of chicken. I'm not sure they're actually in the wrong, though. Generally, the car in front of you has the right of way, even if you disagree with what they are doing.

I would say Car A, especially if they didn't signal. I get that B may have been impatient, but if it takes too long to parallel park in that spot, then that spot is not for you.

And when you parallel park, you still have to be aware of moving vehicles around you. Your attention should not be laser focused on parallel parking - you must multitask your awareness.

Anonymous wrote:Agree, Car B at fault.

Only possible exception I can think of is if A was mostly in the spot, B had room to go safely by, then A jumped out and sideswiped B trying to improve the angle of the park or something like that. Even then, B should hold their horses.

+1. What state? It matters.

Technically both, but I'd say car B

If a car is reversing at the time of impact, the other cars insurer is going to find them at fault