You hit a parked vehicle. Its hard to argue that you are not liable. On the other hand, you have an argument that the truck was also "at fault" or "negligent" or "liable," however; it would be a far reach to claim that the parked vehicle was more at fault than you.
no attorney client relationship has been formed.
The "last clear chance" doctrine frequently applies to a person not originally the cause of an accident, but that could have avoided it.
A parked vehicle generally has no chance to avoid an accident . . .
Unfortunately, you probably still have some liability, but if you have auto insurance, which is required by law in California, let your insurance company deal with it, although you will be responsible for any deductable? If the damage to the truck is not too great, try making a deal with the other driver, 50/50 as he was parked illegally and but for that, the accident would not have occurred. That way you can avoid any increased premium or the risk your carrier will drop you for having a claim?
Legal disclaimer:This message does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Any statements are made for general informational purposes and do not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client privilege is created by this communication. Attorney is licensed in California only.
The consequence would be a parking ticket. Other potential consequences depend upon the facts. So if the truck parked illegally and as a result a person exiting the store wouldnt be seen by a driver coming across the pkg lot, and the person gets hit, the truck could be sued as part of the cause. If you were backing up, and suddenly the trusk pulled in behind you in a spot it shouldnt be parking in, the truck could be at fault.
I am sorry but unfortunately, it seems like the consensus of opinion is that you are in the wrong. Additionally, your insurance carrier is saying the same thing.
Mr. Crosner is licensed to practice law in California and has been practicing law in California since 1978. The response herein is general legal and business analysis.. It is not intended nor construed to be "legal advice" but rather it is analysis, and different lawyers may analyze this matter differently, especially if there are additional facts not reflected in the question. Oftentimes the question does not include significant and important facts and timelines that, if known, could significantly change the reply and make it unsuitable. I am not your attorney until retained by a written retainer agreement signed by both of us. See also avvo.com terms and conditions item 9, incorporated as if it was reprinted here.
Based on your posting, it appears you are completely at fault. You are not supposed to hit fixed objects, regardless of their location. Let your insurance company resolve this matter for you.
If this information has been helpful, please indicate below.
Mr. Lundeen is licensed to practice law in Florida and Vermont. The response herein is not legal advice and does not create an attorney/client relationship. The response is in the form of legal education and is intended to provide general information about the matter within the question. Oftentimes the question does not include significant and important facts and timelines that, if known, could significantly change the reply and make it unsuitable. Mr. Lundeen strongly advises the questioner to confer with an attorney in your state in order to ensure proper advice is received.
This ans. does not create an attorney/client relationship.
A roundup of the best tips and legal advice.