Who's at fault? - apartment block prang - Page 2

AUIIPURSUIT · 08-05-2011, 04:09 PM

id safely assume theres a 10kph speed limit in the carpark, so long as she wasnt exceeding that, then the reversing party is at fault.

V8 6I · 08-05-2011, 04:15 PM

You said the guy reversing out was in a Commodore,So that makes it his fault.

xisled · 08-05-2011, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Here we go again.... a PRIVATE carpark is not a road related area.
A carpark in an apartment complex is PRIVATE.

By your logic this means the council can enter a PRIVATE carpark and remove an unregistered vehicle.
Going further by what you say it also means i cant drive an unregistered car in a private carpark.
Or better still I cant drive an unregistered car up and down my driveway.

Re read what I said... a PUBLIC carpark where the general public is openly invited such as a carpark at a pub or shopping center is different to an apartment complex carpark.

Read that quote carefully.... the word PUBLIC is the key word.
A carpark in an apartment complex is NOT open to the general public.

You are comparing 2 different law types. 1 is council by laws and other is road rules. The 2 are very different from each other. Road rules apply for any car park, driveway, private or not.

Yaw · 08-05-2011, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Its private land... so the traffic law doesnt apply

Yes they do, its a road related area,

13 What is a road-related area
(1) A road-related area is any of the following—
(a) an area that divides a road;
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road;
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public
and designated for use by cyclists or animals;
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to, or used by,
the public for parking vehicles.

Jim,
I personally have had this type of claim go before a magistrate before where the other party was using your argument. The magistrate ruled in our (insurance company) favor and ordered the third party to pay our court costs and leagals also.

shedcoupe · 08-05-2011, 04:57 PM

Does this public / private thing vary much from state to state ?

Yaw · 08-05-2011, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shedcoupe

Does this public / private thing vary much from state to state ?

No, The road rules are very similar right across australia. Its mainly the infringment fees that differ.

xisled · 08-05-2011, 05:00 PM

NO its the same for every state.

The Monty · 08-05-2011, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Here we go again.... a PRIVATE carpark is not a road related area.
A carpark in an apartment complex is PRIVATE.

By your logic this means the council can enter a PRIVATE carpark and remove an unregistered vehicle.
Going further by what you say it also means i cant drive an unregistered car in a private carpark.
Or better still I cant drive an unregistered car up and down my driveway.

Re read what I said... a PUBLIC carpark where the general public is openly invited such as a carpark at a pub or shopping center is different to an apartment complex carpark.

Read that quote carefully.... the word PUBLIC is the key word.
A carpark in an apartment complex is NOT open to the general public.

Im not going to argue, as Im pretty sure you know the law first hand.
I know we have distinguished what public land is, but what legislation covers private land, and car useage?
Im not saying your wrong, so dont get up me (only learning this stuff recently), but if there are multiple people in an apartment block, parking multiple cars, and visitors can also park there, and it is a designated car park, accessible by the public, it would be classified as public? Otherwise a pedestrian walking passed swerves around a crack on the footpath, and steps onto the drieway, and the person backs into them, there is no law that could be used to charge them?

Again, not arguing, just wondering which sl you use in the circumstance?

The Monty · 08-05-2011, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xisled

NO its the same for every state.

Its not the same for every state. This is state law, not commonwealth, each state has its own legislation, worded in its own way that that state only would follow.

xisled · 08-05-2011, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monty

Its not the same for every state. This is state law, not commonwealth, each state has its own legislation, worded in its own way that that state only would follow.

It may be worded different, but in all states car parks are treated the same, road rules apply to them.

nstg8a · 08-05-2011, 05:19 PM

i would think that the gate will make all the difference here

as i understand the rules, a public access area is normally defined as an area where any one can wander,whether theyre allowed to or not.
when its gated it becomes private access property, as there is a physical barrier stopping the public from entering.

eg, i know in nz (i know different countries but you would be surprised how much each country has identical/very similar laws) where i was working we had barrier arms controlling entry, and forklift drivers only needed normal forklift licenses, but at my previous job we had no barriers, and forklift drivers needed a f endorsement on their car license. as it was classed as public access.

jase1 · 08-05-2011, 05:54 PM

Gentlemen, I believe the matter has been dealt with, let's not get all flustered here.

Jim Goose · 08-05-2011, 06:06 PM

And no one has bothered to reply to what I said

Are you all saying that in an apartment complex carpark, or your own driveway you cant drive an unregistered car? an unroadworthy car and drive unlicenced?

A simple yes or no answer....

Yaw · 08-05-2011, 06:58 PM

Jim you can drive an unregistered or unroadworthy car on private property, but it does not mean the road rules do no apply.

Lets take a hypotheitcal on the situation desribed by the OP.
Lets say the exact same situation occurred but the OP's Young female friend was unlicenced in an unregistered car.
Would this change the liability?
The answer is no, it does not take away the reversing cars need to exercise due care and attention.
Now do not confuse this with if the police were involved that the Young female would not be given infringement notices for driving unlicenced or an unregistered vehicle. But neither of those things have contributed to the accident. Therefore as far as liability goes the reversing party is still the one with the highest duty of care.

As for not being open to public, If I go to visit a friend there and park in the complex, I am a member of the public that it is open to.

The Monty · 08-05-2011, 07:34 PM

Mr Goose, no offence, but I did quote your whole post. Jase 1, yes, although the OP has had his question answered, I think its important that we ascertain the proper wording of the law here, just for a bit of personal knowledge. There is no bickering, no animosity, its just good discussion.

Jim Goose · 08-05-2011, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yaw

Jim you can drive an unregistered or unroadworthy car on private property, but it does not mean the road rules do no apply.

Lets take a hypotheitcal on the situation desribed by the OP.
Lets say the exact same situation occurred but the OP's Young female friend was unlicenced in an unregistered car.
Would this change the liability?
The answer is no, it does not take away the reversing cars need to exercise due care and attention.
Now do not confuse this with if the police were involved that the Young female would not be given infringement notices for driving unlicenced or an unregistered vehicle. But neither of those things have contributed to the accident. Therefore as far as liability goes the reversing party is still the one with the highest duty of care.

As for not being open to public, If I go to visit a friend there and park in the complex, I am a member of the public that it is open to.

And you didnt answer my question....

Legal liability has nothing to do with road rules.

And you still do not understand the meaning of a PUBLIC carpark as opposed to a private one. Again by your example given just because i can enter someones property unhindered, its public!
It has nothing to do with being hindered, locked up, fenced...

Your unfenced front yard for instance is open to the "public" yet it isnt a public space... its private property. It not open to the public. There is no open invitation to the general public to enter YOUR premises.

As another example you own a business and as a business your doors are open to the general public, you have a car park out front, its open to the general public, there is an open invitation to use it.

A private residence such as a apartment complex it NOT OPEN to the public.
It is there for the sole purpose of residents and guests. Not any tom, dick and harry who just want to park there.

Im sorry I cant explain it simpler... we are not talking about physical barriers.

Your reply is incorrect, you contradicted yourself.
You said you can drive an unregistered car there but the road rules apply.
Im sorry???? You cant have both. If the road rules apply then it also means you cant drive an unregistered car on private land. You must be registered to drive on a road...

In essence what your saying is that road rules apply in your front lawn.... your own driveway. There are NO road rules on private property. If i have a road on a 1000acres I can drive as fast as i want, when i want, in an unregistered car while completely drunk (but unwise).

Yes the OP got his answer, but this discussion about ROAD laws applying to private land keeps coming up and it is a myth.

Kryton · 08-05-2011, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Yes the OP got his answer, but this discussion about ROAD laws applying to private land keeps coming up and it is a myth.

Explain being able to be done for drink driving on private land then.
There are numerous other road rules that apply to private land whether you like it or not.

xisled · 09-05-2011, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

And you didnt answer my question....

Legal liability has nothing to do with road rules.

And you still do not understand the meaning of a PUBLIC carpark as opposed to a private one. Again by your example given just because i can enter someones property unhindered, its public!
It has nothing to do with being hindered, locked up, fenced...

Your unfenced front yard for instance is open to the "public" yet it isnt a public space... its private property. It not open to the public. There is no open invitation to the general public to enter YOUR premises.

As another example you own a business and as a business your doors are open to the general public, you have a car park out front, its open to the general public, there is an open invitation to use it.

A private residence such as a apartment complex it NOT OPEN to the public.
It is there for the sole purpose of residents and guests. Not any tom, dick and harry who just want to park there.

Im sorry I cant explain it simpler... we are not talking about physical barriers.

Your reply is incorrect, you contradicted yourself.
You said you can drive an unregistered car there but the road rules apply.
Im sorry???? You cant have both. If the road rules apply then it also means you cant drive an unregistered car on private land. You must be registered to drive on a road...

In essence what your saying is that road rules apply in your front lawn.... your own driveway. There are NO road rules on private property. If i have a road on a 1000acres I can drive as fast as i want, when i want, in an unregistered car while completely drunk (but unwise).

Yes the OP got his answer, but this discussion about ROAD laws applying to private land keeps coming up and it is a myth.

Jim_goose you have to remember insurance is not criminal law, your example of driving an unregistered car comes under criminal law and is a police matter. Now insurance is civil law. Based on the facts of what has happened. I will give you an example. If some person parked in your driveway inside the boundary of your property and you reverse out and hit the car, because you did not expect it to be there. But you did not give permission for the person to be there, you would still be held responsible for the damage by the insurance company. Tho what you could do is charge the person with trespassing, and that is a police matter.

Also another case most people have heard about is where a person breaks into a house and hurts himself and sues the owner for not making it safe, but the police charge him with break and enter.

The answer is road rules still apply in private car parks, but not for criminals acts such as driving unregistered.

Jim Goose · 09-05-2011, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

Explain being able to be done for drink driving on private land then.
There are numerous other road rules that apply to private land whether you like it or not.

Numerous others?? they either ALL apply or they dont... its that simple.
They are all part of the same legislation, you cant pick and choose.

And you cant be done for drink driving on private property... another urban myth. If you drove home drunk and were caught at home after the fact then yes.... but if you never left the premises and the car never left the premises, then you cant be done for drink driving because you are not on a road or a road related area (unless is a PUBLIC carpark)

The fact remains you can drive an unregistered vehicle on your land or in a private carpark (as opposed to a public one)

Quote:

The answer is road rules still apply in private car parks, but not for criminals acts such as driving unregistered.

Since when is breaking the road rules a criminal act?

Dave3911 · 09-05-2011, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Legal liability has nothing to do with road rules.

That is a very naive comment to make. Whilst it is very true that often civil liability and criminal law don't always go hand in hand, insurance companies (and the courts) do certainly use the road rules as a basis when they deteirmine liability for motor vehicle collisions - regardless where they occur. It's also for this reason that when detirmining this liability sometimes "road rules" can be applied that may not necessarily apply in a criminal court. Nobody in this thread is arguing that the other driving could get a ticket from the cops for reversing in an unsafe manner - but the insurance company can still use the same road rule to assist in detirmining civil liability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_Goose

Your reply is incorrect, you contradicted yourself.
You said you can drive an unregistered car there but the road rules apply.
Im sorry???? You cant have both. If the road rules apply then it also means you cant drive an unregistered car on private land. You must be registered to drive on a road...

I don't think that's what he is getting at at all. He is saying that relevant parts of the road rules can still be used to detirmine civil liability on private land - regardless of if that road rule applies to private land or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Numerous others?? they either ALL apply or they dont... its that simple.
They are all part of the same legislation, you cant pick and choose.

Not all aspects of road law enforcement are part of the same legislation. For example, in Victoria, general road rules are found in the Road Rules. Offences for drink driving are found in the Road Safety Act.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

And you cant be done for drink driving on private property... another urban myth. If you drove home drunk and were caught at home after the fact then yes.... but if you never left the premises and the car never left the premises, then you cant be done for drink driving because you are not on a road or a road related area (unless is a PUBLIC carpark)

You do realise that this fine country of ours has a few different states with a few different applications of law, right? You certainly can be charged with drink driving on private property in Victoria. A good friend of mine from school was when he rolled his car whilst paddock bashing. As per your example, his car was unregistered and unroadworthy too. Wasn't charged for those. Law in Victoria only requires you to be "in charge" of a motor vehicle for drink driving offences, it doesn't require for that motor vehicle to be on a road.

It is absolutely amazing how different these laws can be in the different states. Channel 9 have an "RBT" program that focuses on these types of offences. On last weeks episode they followed a motorcycle doing warp factor who managed to get his bike into his driveway and they pulled up about 20 seconds lader, with the rider still outside. This was in NSW and the Sgt involved clearly informed the rider that as he was on "private property" he was unable to ask him to submit for a breath test. He would have to charge the driver with a flat out "Driving under the influence" charge, rather than a specific BAC offence and use his "Own Observations" to form the basis of the charge.

In Victoria - he would have been asked to submit, no questions asked - the ground on which he is now standing isn't relevent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim_Goose

Since when is breaking the road rules a criminal act?

Really? Do we have to go there? a silly argument to have & one that will have forum members debating dictionary definitions.

Kryton · 09-05-2011, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

And you cant be done for drink driving on private property... another urban myth. If you drove home drunk and were caught at home after the fact then yes.... but if you never left the premises and the car never left the premises, then you cant be done for drink driving because you are not on a road or a road related area (unless is a PUBLIC carpark)

You really dont know what your talking about do you.
May pay to get your facts straight if you plan on challenging the knowledge of others here.

AndrewR_AUII · 09-05-2011, 11:16 AM

Years ago had my car run into while parked in a strata car park.
Yes, it was covered by insurance.

bobthebilda · 09-05-2011, 11:30 AM

Cant be bothered reading all the other psosts, but my general 2 cents worth. Road Rules dont apply to private property. Thats why you can do 200 kilomtres on a race track, despite the speed limit being 60kmh outside the track. Or its why you can drive your unregistered car up and down the driveway as much as you like, and the police cant do a thing about it.

A person driving forward has just as much duty of care as a person reversing. In this situation, if she got into tears during the sorting of the problem, I assume she would break down when under questioning by a half decent solicitor on the witness box, so "blame" is never going to be determined anyhow ie did she stop before entering the car park to allow her eye sight to adjust to the darkness etc etc. Courts dont work on honesty, they work on who tells the most beilavable story to the magistrate (and having lots of money for a good solicitor will often turn a bad story into a beleivable story). Insurance and some excess takes call of all blame (and should be used at all times)

Eleanor · 09-05-2011, 12:01 PM

Some of this applies here.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/printth...11304035&pp=30

XRATE-UTERUS · 09-05-2011, 12:15 PM

id say she got the blame, he has beenonline and hasnt posted here .oops

StrokedXT · 09-05-2011, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Here we go again.... a PRIVATE carpark is not a road related area.
A carpark in an apartment complex is PRIVATE.

By your logic this means the council can enter a PRIVATE carpark and remove an unregistered vehicle.
Going further by what you say it also means i cant drive an unregistered car in a private carpark.
Or better still I cant drive an unregistered car up and down my driveway.

Re read what I said... a PUBLIC carpark where the general public is openly invited such as a carpark at a pub or shopping center is different to an apartment complex carpark.

Read that quote carefully.... the word PUBLIC is the key word.
A carpark in an apartment complex is NOT open to the general public.

IS there are a visitors car spot? If so it is Public.

I disagree with your posts as to who is at fault, i know in a past life in the insurance industry who would have been paying the excess and it wouldnt be the posters GF.

EDIT: Obviously as long as the damage was directly side on as suggested by the diagram.

Flaming Mo · 09-05-2011, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Numerous others?? they either ALL apply or they dont... its that simple.
They are all part of the same legislation, you cant pick and choose.

And you cant be done for drink driving on private property... another urban myth. If you drove home drunk and were caught at home after the fact then yes.... but if you never left the premises and the car never left the premises, then you cant be done for drink driving because you are not on a road or a road related area (unless is a PUBLIC carpark)

You have made this false claim several times on this forum. You are wrong now, same as you were the last time you made the declaration. Qld drink driving legislation is provided in the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995;

79 Vehicle offences involving liquor or other drugs
(1) Offence of driving etc. while under the influence
Any person who, while under the influence of liquor or a
drug—
(a) drives a motor vehicle, tram, train or vessel; or
(b) attempts to put in motion a motor vehicle, tram, train or
vessel; or
(c) is in charge of a motor vehicle, tram, train or vessel;
is guilty of an offence and liable to a penalty not exceeding 28
penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 9
months.

They are the ELEMENTS of the offence above. Nowhere, is a ‘road’ or ‘road related area’ mentioned in the charge. To check for traffic offences involving ‘roads’ and ‘road related areas’, please refer to the completely SEPARATE Transport Operations (Road Use Management – Road Rules) Regulation 2009.

For future reference, there are two vehicle related offences that do not need to occur on a ‘road’ or ‘road related area’. They are ‘Drink Driving’ offences provided in the legislation above (separate to Road Rules), and ‘Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle’ provided under S328A of the Qld Criminal Code Act 1899 (not including lawful races / speed trials). The legislation or sections for these two offences make NO reference whatsoever to ‘roads’ or ‘road related areas’. They need only occur anywhere within the borders of Queensland.

I know this is off topic, but feel it’s important that forum members are not given dud information on such issues. And yes, I spent considerable time dealing with those sorts of matters for a living.

Cheers.

dogfish · 11-05-2011, 07:36 PM

JIM Goose +1. So the insurance company is going to repair/pay for an unregistered car if it gets smacked into for arguements sake by the guy reversing according to you and this diagram YAW.
If the road rules applied then the unregistered car is automatically in the wrong as you have no registration or roadworthy hence the vehicle shouldn't even be there in the first place.

Yaw · 11-05-2011, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogfish

JIM Goose +1. So the insurance company is going to repair/pay for an unregistered car if it gets smacked into for arguements sake by the guy reversing according to you and this diagram YAW.
If the road rules applied then the unregistered car is automatically in the wrong as you have no registration or roadworthy hence the vehicle shouldn't even be there in the first place.

Makes no difference what so ever to liability mate.... I Do work in recoveries and settlements for an insurer. I will give you an actual example on this one claim I was handling. Our client was a T intersection turning right from a give way sign. They collided with a car that was turning into where our insured was turning out of. Our client is 100% at fault and we paid the other guy out despite the car being unregistered and the other driver blew over the limit and was charged with DUI. Niether factor of the car being unregistered or the other driver being over the limit contributed to the accident. It was caused soley by our client failing to give way. It did not negate our clients duty of care.

TURBOTAXI · 11-05-2011, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TURBOTAXI

I think an area accessible from the road (even private property) the same rules as the road apply. Reversing driver should have given way.

I quoted my own post to make myself feel special. An because I tried to make the point early.

In an area that is accessible from the road (even private property) the road rules apply. I have had this discussion at work some time ago and can confirm that in NSW, your own driveway can meet the test of being accessible and having road rules apply. I have no doubt that a shared parking area would meet the criteria as accessible.

If you close a gate or something like that then your property is not accessible.