Hmmm...
Firstly, you are not at risk while not looking right, provided you checked a second ago that nothing's coming at you. You can not hit anything stationary to your right, as you are not going that way and you know there's nothing approaching. You have to look where you're going, especially when setting off from stationary.
I do agree that the police officer's actions do seem a bit extreme. However, he would have been no more in the way than if the traffic to the OP's friend's left had jammed up, and the cars had queued back to the left of the OP's car. This often happens at the end of our street, and there would have been a few occasions where I'd have crashed into someone had I been looking to the right while pulling out.
There's a general principle that you are not allowed to drive into something just because it's not where you expected it to be. The police car did not reverse into the side of the OP's car, the OP drove forwards (from a side road too) into the side of the police car.
The police car was just an obstruction in the road that the OP drove into. That obstruction could have just as easily been a cyclist, child or anything else.
In the worst case, the OP's friend could have void insurance, and have to personally pay for the cost of repairs to the police car. Then there could be a fine + points for using a phone, careless driving and driving without insurance.
I personally think this could be a very serious matter, which is why I wouldn't think it's a good idea to antagonise by disputing anything. I can't see how you could defend against it - the only argument the other way is that they shouldn't have been there, which is no defence at all.
Firstly, you are not at risk while not looking right, provided you checked a second ago that nothing's coming at you. You can not hit anything stationary to your right, as you are not going that way and you know there's nothing approaching. You have to look where you're going, especially when setting off from stationary.
I do agree that the police officer's actions do seem a bit extreme. However, he would have been no more in the way than if the traffic to the OP's friend's left had jammed up, and the cars had queued back to the left of the OP's car. This often happens at the end of our street, and there would have been a few occasions where I'd have crashed into someone had I been looking to the right while pulling out.
There's a general principle that you are not allowed to drive into something just because it's not where you expected it to be. The police car did not reverse into the side of the OP's car, the OP drove forwards (from a side road too) into the side of the police car.
The police car was just an obstruction in the road that the OP drove into. That obstruction could have just as easily been a cyclist, child or anything else.
In the worst case, the OP's friend could have void insurance, and have to personally pay for the cost of repairs to the police car. Then there could be a fine + points for using a phone, careless driving and driving without insurance.
I personally think this could be a very serious matter, which is why I wouldn't think it's a good idea to antagonise by disputing anything. I can't see how you could defend against it - the only argument the other way is that they shouldn't have been there, which is no defence at all.
Last edited:
