The fundamental issue is: were you negligent? In other words, did you
act in a manner in which a reasonably prudent person under similar
circumstances would not have acted? Would a reasonably prudent person
have backed down a dark, unlighted driveway at night knowing that
perhaps a neighbor's car would be parked there (apparently there was
some historical precedent for cars being parked in the common
driveway, even if it was not technically permitted by association
rules). This is the exact analysis your insurance company will
perform in determining if they will provide coverage. If they go so
far as to determine that you acted recklessly or in a grossly
negligent manner (you absolutely ignored rules governing proper,
reasonable conduct), they may deny coverage under your policy.
If it is concluded that perhaps yes, you were negligent given the
foregoing analysis, the next question is whether any part of the fault
can be apportioned to your neighbor for parking on an unlighted common
driveway when he knew it was against association rules and knew he
might get hit if he parked there. If you were to sue the neighbor for
damages, this is the analysis the jury would undertake--an
apportionment of fault under a legal doctrine called comparative
fault. If the jury finds you 60% at fault and your damages are
$1,000, then you will recover $400 from the neighbor. Same if your
neighbor sued you?his damages will be apportioned based on fault, or
by the amount of your recovery under a counterclaim, as the case may
be. On these facts, I would apportion the fault 50/50--you were at
fault for backing down the dark driveway without checking for
obstructions, and your neighbor was at fault for parking in a dark
common driveway at night.
I feel you should not involve the insurance company for this amount of
money. You should try to work it out amicably with the
neighbor--suggest that since you were both partially at fault that you
each repair your own cars and walk away as friends. |