It actually happened to me. I was stopped behind an Explorer at a red light, when for no apparent reason, he backed into me. The first words out of the driver’s mouth were “Sorry, I couldn’t see behind me.” Which to my way of thinking should have been reason aplenty not to put his vehicle in reverse. Turns out there was a McDonalds across the way to the left, and his kids were hungry. Anyway, he had no insurance and no valid driver’s license. He was kind enough to give me his real name and social security number, but my insurance company has yet to collect anything from him. I’d just like to get my deductible back. My insurance company did catch up with him, but he is unemployed and being supported by his girlfriend. It was her car he was driving when he hit me.
I would suspect a high speed chase on a highway resulting in several cars jumping off the backs of semi trucks and smashing through billboards and a freeze frame of Ponch and John laughing.
I’m not sure if it’s the same elsewhere, but I’m pretty sure that in a case like that specified by the OP, unless there was injury or damage to street furniture, the police would just shrug, record the available facts (two damaged card, contradictory driver claims, no witnesses, etc) and leave it for the insurance companies to mop up. The insurance companies would probably treat it as knock-for-knock.
My best guess would be that a rear end collision would probably produce considerably more damage than if a car was backed into. I think you’d have to GUN it in reverse to do do anything other than superficial damage.
There’s an old story about an irish beat cop who witnesses a minor rear ender at a stop sign. He walks over to the front car and tells the driver to stay in his car and he will take care of things. When he reaches the offending driver he sees that it’s a catholic priest and says, " Aye Father, and how fast would you say ‘e was goin’ when he backed into ya’!?
I don’t follow, why would you roll back when driving with a manual gearbox? :dubious:
Failure to use the handbrake? - Holding the car stationary on the clutch should not result in any rolling back, neither should a properly-executed hill start using the handbrake, but if you have your right foot on the brake and you move it to the accelerator as you release the clutch with your left foot, then you can roll back.
If you try to prevent this by releasing the clutch a little before taking off the brake, the engine can easily stall, as it is only ticking over.
In the small amount of time that it takes to catch the clutch the car is essentially in neutral and it can roll backwards.
er for the clutch to catch.
That’s what I thought, a bit of laziness for the chance of rolling back into the car behind.