Under what circumstances is reversing not at fault?

[LeahRose]

According to the new traffic regulations "Road Traffic Accident Handling Procedures", the following situations are determined to be not at fault when reversing: 1. The other party's fault: If the road traffic accident is caused by the fault of the other party, the other driver is not responsible. 2. Traffic accident: If neither party is at fault for causing the road traffic accident, it is a traffic accident and neither party is responsible. 3. Intentional behavior: If one party intentionally causes a road accident, the other driver is not responsible. The specific situation is handed over to the traffic police department, which will handle and determine the responsibility.

[RafaelFitz]

I've been driving for almost thirty years, and to avoid liability when reversing, there are a few special circumstances that must be met. The first is being rear-ended—you're reversing slowly when the car behind suddenly accelerates and hits you. If the dashcam captures this, the other party is fully at fault. The second is when the other party intentionally causes a collision, and there's evidence showing they actively hit your rear. The third is relatively rare, such as sudden natural disasters like earthquakes or falling rocks causing loss of vehicle control. There's also a legal scenario where the other party commits a serious violation first, like drunk driving or going the wrong way into your reversing path, leaving no time to react. But honestly, in nine out of ten reversing accidents, you'll likely be held liable because the law requires you to clearly assess the road conditions. My advice is to always use the reversing camera, check the mirrors frequently, and ideally have someone get out to guide you.

[AdrianLynn]

Last week I just encountered a situation where reversing was not at fault! I was slowly backing out of a parking spot in a mall garage, moving at a snail's pace, when suddenly a modified car came speeding from the opposite diagonal direction and scraped my rear bumper. The traffic police reviewed the surveillance footage and immediately ruled it as the other driver's full responsibility because they were speeding and failed to observe the road conditions. Actually, this kind of situation is quite typical: reversing can only be exempt from liability when the other party has significant negligence leading to the accident. Common scenarios include the other driver being drunk, running a red light, or even driving without a license. Another case is when encountering professional insurance scammers; as long as your dashcam captures them repeatedly adjusting their angle to intentionally collide with you, you can also argue for no fault. Normally, I always use the radar beep as an aid when reversing, since unexpected situations are hard to predict.

[Barbara]

From a legal perspective, three conditions must be met to be deemed not at fault in a reversing situation. First, clear liability must point to the other party, such as when they forcibly change lanes into your reversing path. Second, the other party must have committed a substantive violation, like driving under the influence or intentionally causing an accident. Third, there must be a complete chain of evidence, including dashcam footage, surveillance, or witness testimony. Extreme circumstances like natural disasters require certification from the meteorological bureau. Note that reversing in a one-way street typically results in full liability, so it's best to perform such maneuvers in enclosed spaces like parking lots.