They say I'm 100% at fault for a parking lot backup — but I was already halfway out??

I used to work claims and I'll be honest — that "backing vehicle = 100% at fault" line is a starting position, not a legal conclusion. Adjusters say it because a lot of people just accept it and it closes the file fast. The point-of-impact location genuinely does matter in these disputes. A rear-bumper hit tells a different story than a mid-door or front-quarter hit. If you have photos showing where the damage is on your car, submit them explicitly with a written statement explaining the geometry. Make them actually document why they're rejecting your argument instead of just stonewalling you.

Not legal advice, but the point-of-impact argument you're describing is a legitimate one that does come up in comparative fault states. The location of damage can be used to reconstruct where your vehicle was at the moment of impact, which speaks to whether the other driver had time and distance to avoid you. If the adjuster keeps stonewalling, a free consult with a PI attorney costs you nothing and they can tell you pretty quickly whether this is worth escalating. Most won't charge just to talk.

Please do not just take what their adjuster says as gospel. That person works for the other driver's insurance company. Their job is literally to minimize what they pay out. You are not their customer, you are their adversary. Be polite but be persistent, and put everything in writing.

Just making sure — are you physically okay? Sometimes you feel fine right after and then two or three days later your neck or back starts screaming at you. If anything feels off, even minor soreness, please get checked out and make sure it's documented medically. Don't push through it and don't assume it'll just go away.

I don't want to be harsh but I'm curious — how fast was the other car going? And was this a one-way drive lane or two-way? Because if it was a two-way lane and they were on their correct side moving at a normal parking lot speed, the argument that they "should have seen you" gets a little harder to make. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think knowing that context would help figure out how strong your case actually is.

The fact that you're asking questions and gathering evidence already puts you way ahead of most people in this situation. A lot of folks just freeze up or take the first offer because the whole thing feels overwhelming. You clearly aren't doing that. Keep going.

A few practical things: First, send any communications to the adjuster via email so you have a paper trail — stop doing this stuff over the phone if you have been. Second, formally request their written explanation for the 100% fault determination. They should have one and making them put it in writing sometimes changes the tone of the conversation. Third, if you have your own collision coverage, your own insurer can sometimes go to bat for you in a process called subrogation — worth asking them about.

Document everything right now if you haven't already. Timestamped photos of both cars' damage, a written diagram of the parking lot layout, and any witness info. Also find out if your complex has security cameras covering that lot — those recordings get overwritten fast, sometimes within days. That footage could be the whole ballgame.

I went through almost this exact thing last year. Other driver's insurance hit me with the same "you were backing, you're at fault" line and I just accepted it like an idiot. Wish I had pushed back. The side-impact detail you have is actually a real argument — that wasn't something I had going for me. Don't let them bully you into eating 100%.