Good morning all As a company we are currently considering the pro's and con's of requiring employees and visitors to reverse park their cars at all of our sites. Your thoughts and comments would be welcomed. Thank you Mike

Laughing at Invictus's reply, awaiting responses. Reverse parking is considered safer as when you drive up to a space, you are more aware of everything going surrounding the space. Therefor it is deemed safer to reverse into it and drive out. When returning to a car that has been driven in, it takes a few moments to get in, fit the seatbelt and start the car. During this time, pedestrians may be walking behind the car without drawing the attention of the driver.

One of my pet hates - reminds me of not enough deck chairs on the Titanic. There is a fatuous argument it is safer to reverse park. Forgetting of course that many tradesmen need access to the rear of their vehicle for tools and equipment. I have worked in environments where it's mandatory to reverse park (unless you work for the client or you are a senior manager) but the safety on the project has been dire. What sort of message does this send out?

Many thanks to all who have posted so far - much appreciated. Mike

Parking should be staggered so alternate cares face inwards/ outwards. This is to allow the passenger sides of the vehicle of both cars to be millimetres away from one another. That way there is room on the drivers side to actually allow them to get out /in. My car currently has a lovely dent & scratch down the side where someone thought they could get a shopping trolley past as they had reversed in, so not a big fan. Also quite a few parking spaces will have a wall or barrier or hedge at the end and so reversing in will prevent access to the boot properly. You have probably identified an issue where you work, but people will not appreciate being told which way around to park.

Pro, you take your time reversing in, in the morning so it is safer. Con, your so made up to be out of work in the evening you jump in and because your facing forward you drive out quicker shouting yipeeee, I'm free. As I say I am not a great lover of this sort of safety requirements, it's just something else to police, for little benefit.

Oh Pleeeesss. This sounds absolutely bl***** ridiculous. Just the sort of ludicrous rule that gets Health and Safety ridiculed, and in cases like this deservedly so. Chris Packham’s and RayRap's comment accepted don’t waste your time and energy on something that can only result in ruining whatever credibility you’ve managed to garner. If there’s a good reason then consult consult consult and get the workforce on board. If you can’t then don’t it’ll only cause alienation. Sorry, it’s been a long week, getting wound up and it’s nice to have a place to let off steam.

Aviva, weren't to happy when my wife backed into a lamp-post.

My local Council Offices have a notice banning reverse parking in an area where the parking bay is against a wall with office windows in it - obviously, someone had complained about car fumes in the office.

From a personal point of view, I find it so much easier to drive into the parking space and back out of it. This sequence seems to mean that I am parked more quickly [thus not blocking the road whilst I back in] and backing out of a narrow gap is so much easier than backing into one [so quicker all round]. Also, if I am going to get the car hit when exiting a parking space, I prefer that the back rather than the engine area 'gets it' Only time I would insist on a 'back in' policy would be if it was essential that a very quick exit from car park area was essential on safety grounds

As a general rule, it is recommended by the Highway Code, the Institute of Advanced Motorists (try passing your advanced test without doing it) and others. But common sense must always prevail, and in some circumstances it is not the best thing to do, amongst other things if you need access to the rear of the car. It is not a silly thing, as some have suggested, as the potential to avoid collisions, with other cars or pedestrians, is considerable, especially when you consider how bad some drivers are at using mirrors and looking behind properly.

I see this thread still going strong. If we take supermarket car parks for an example they do not have a reversing policy. That is because most people need to access the rear of their vehicle to put shopping away. There are tens of thousands of people who use these every day. I dare say they have their fare share of incidents, but I'm not aware of any particular issues through not reverse parking.

Hello Victor and welcome back. Yep, the usual nonsense is still dominating these forums. I know what you're thinking - I don't believe it! :)P

NOT AGAIN!!!!! Only just recovering from the last thread

If there is a tangible risk that can be controlled through reverse parking then it needs to be considered. If the risk is negligible then it does not. The issue I regularly come across is people thinking since a scenario is possible it is tangible. Only MPH can make that judgment knowing all the facts. However I do see it will be impossible to enforce without the car park design encouraging it (angled bays, one-way system). I have seen such a layout on construction sites which worked most of the time. There was also pedestrian’s segregation and a foreseeable risk from site traffic. I would not expect to see such controls for a typical office car park.

I used to work at a factory where reverse parking alongside the building was forbidden. Allegedly this followed Government advice during WW2, to give the engine some protection from enemy machine-gun bullets. The Site Services Manager did admit though, that the reason they sustained the rule was to avoid exhaust smoke marks on the nice clean paintwork of the factory wall. FWIW, I'm a committed reverse parker. I've seen several incidents caused by reversing out of a parking space, and I know of a couple of injuries caused by reversing out of a private drive. A couple of weeks ago outside my local supermarket someone reversed into my wife and I as we walked back to our car - he then had the cheek to complain that our trolley had scratched his car! (It hadn't - yet!)

I am struggling to understand what the problem is here. If you cannot see that driving out of a parking space gives you better vision than reversing out of one, and that you are therefore more likely to avoid pedestrians and other vehicles, then I'm not sure what more there is to say. The evidence is before your eyes, literally, and that is why the IAM teach it as part of advanced driving, or are they just trivia as well? Whether a vehicle is two tons, one ton or half a ton, it is still capable of inflicting serious injury or death. As for statistical evidence, you seem to have missed my point. If a safer way of doing something can be found, which costs nothing, then waiting for x number of people to be killed before considering it is surely irresponsible? So no, I don't have statistics on the number of people killed or injured, although I'm sure they could be found, as I didn't think they were needed to recommend a simple safety measure. And I did state quite clearly that common sense should prevail, and it might not always be the best thing to do.

If there's a walkway behind the parking space & I reverse park my Transit Jumbo, then people seem to complain that it overhangs the walkway so people can't get past! Also the back of the van often ends up so close to the building that I can't open the doors. I also find that if I can open the doors then I block the walkway with them, so it's drive in & reverse out, with the reversing camera, & a banksman if needed. Mind then the van hangs right across the "roadway". Same as it does if I park it with the back not overhanging the pathway, or far enough to open the doors. Parking spaces are more often than not too small for vans! ;) The most damage I have ever done to a car in a parking manoeuvre, in fact the only serious damage I have aver done was reversing, because I had a bad neck/shoulder & could not turn my head, and the lighting design was so poor the mirrors were virtually useless. My fault yes, but, there is often more to parking design and use than just the way vehicles were parked. I always thought that in the highway code that if a reversing vehicle had started their move, then from that point other vehicles should give way, as long as, obviously the move had started before the others turned up as it were. As far as which is right, I don't think there is a right & wrong. I also don't think that insisting on reverse parking will definitely be safer, pedestrians can walk behind a vehicle reversing into a parking space also. Larger spaces on the other hand would make manoeuvre easier and safer, regardless of vehicle.

If a proper assessment is conducted , you will find that there is no good reason to ever reverse park. This will come out in the assessment.Just because reverse parking has become the norm , this doesn’t mean its the correct way of doing things. The problem with everybody jumping into vehicles and speeding off is that nobody can be accounted for. You have people spread all over the place and it is then unclear if some people need to be rescued. You then put the rescue teams in danger because you are looking for somebody the jumped in a vehicle and left site. Rather go to the designated muster point. All this is quite silly really. I would love to see a full and proper assessment that justifies reverse parking on a typical UK construction site. Reverse parking has and always will be just a little more dangerous than forward parking. Do a study and this becomes obvious. I think one of the problems is that it’s going to be a little embarrassing to now come out and say that we have been wrong for the past 20 years.

I have seen lots of examples where the ability to leave in an orderly and swift manner without the complexity of reversing constitutes good enough reason. Even in none emergency scenarios i've observed factory workgroup arrivals spread over as much as 45 minutes prior to the start of shift depending on the routines of individuals whereas their departure has been within 5 minutes at the end of shift. 

I can see how a reverse parking policy would be low on many peoples to do list, but I suspect removing one that already exists would probably be even lower.