Hi! I heard an accident/insurance story the other day, which I can’t quite understand: The course was quite clear: Vehicle A parked in a light left-hand corner on a roadside parking strip. Vehicle B came at far too high a speed (30 allowed, estimate of the expert due to the damage was about 80) intoxicated, flew out of the curve as a result of freezing ice and hit vehicle A exactly in the middle (B-pillar). Total damage! Now, however, the liability refuses The only cause of the accident (i.e. B) was to pay the full damage. Reason: Although vehicle A was parked in a permitted place, it was parked there against the direction of travel (which is not allowed). I could still understand that if B had caught the parked car “frontal”, because most of the time a collision in the rear area causes less damage (there is more to the front). Abewr in the present case, where the parked car is quite exactly in the middle of the car. It was not only for the accident course (which only B has to be responsible for) but also for the amount of damage that it had to do.