Child run into side of my car causing damage + small claims court

The child's parents house insurance could actually payout for this.


I had a similar incident, except it was an 18 year old ran into my car (Headphones on, not paying attention etc)


The wingmirror needed replaced and a slight dent on the panel - I never fixed the dent, and got a wingmirror at the scrap yard - cost £40 to buy it and get if fitted.


I informed my insurance company, and because a pedestrian is involved, they sent out an assessor to view the area and get full facts from me, photos the damage etc, in case of a claim at later date - it will be much easier for the insurance company to defend a claim if they get the full facts whenever the accident is fresh in your memory.


As a driver, this is the worst accident I have ever been in, and I have been in a accident where my car rolled and finished up on the roof, where I had to crawl out of it. Hitting a pedestrian, it doesn't matter that it was their fault and they ran into the car, it is very scary, and my first thought was is she ok (she was taken to hospital for a check up, but thankfully ok), at all times I was more concerned about the young girl, than about the damage to the car.


I wouldn't care if the car was a write off and my premiums doubled as long as she was ok.


Yes, having to pay out for damage and get temporary insurance (I was due to change the car the next day, but had to get the damage fixed before selling) was a hassle, but cars can be fixed, it anything had have happened to the girl it would have been much much worse.

I'm with the OP in the sense that the parent should be held accountable for the damage. They let their child loose on the streets when the child has clearly shown themselves to be unaware of how to cross a road and therefore should have been under supervision. The OP should not be out of pocket as a result of this, the parent should morally have said sorry and paid up.

I have a relative to who this happened, his quick reactions meant the child that cycled into the path of his oncoming van was unharmed but the 6 month old previously immaculate van was all scratched up from the bike. Car behind praised him for his quick reactions and admited she only just avoided going up the back of him as she hadn't seen the child at all.....what did the Mum have to say....not even a thank-you for not killing my silly child, no offer of payment, just a 'claim off your insurance' and walked off just like the woman did to the OP. Disgusting.

In answer to the actual question though the OP needs to tell the insurance company as the kid and Mum are probably the sort to falsify an injury claim too so best be ready with the facts. But then just pay for the repairs yourself so it's noted on your record but no actual claim will be set against you. All in all this will cost you hundreds for something that wasn't your fault and you have my sympathy.

Strider590 wrote: »

The stereotyped assumption that they have money to burn is just wrong.

Is the stereotyped assumption that all BMW drivers can't afford to own one correct, though? I'm assuming you know best.

Wow, we really missed having you around. The smell of chips was really starting to fade.

Stoke wrote: »

I really don't think the anti BMW stuff is all that clever. Driving a Hyundai doesn't make you hip and cool. There's no correct way..... Although in the eyes of MSE owning an Audi or BMW makes you evil.

Oh gawd, you've entirely missed the point. I really don't care and should have just said 'reliable little hatchback'. It's you that keeps making up the strawman arguments about people having a down on BMW drivers.

Somebody was hit, the driver doesn't want to tell his insurers, wants to sue the culprit(s), all because £190 is too much for him. Nobody wants such unexpected charges and increased insurance costs, but they're part of motoring. Driving a make known for servicing costs and where you're so worried about the condition of the vehicle I'd expect that to have been thought about before getting the dam thing.

Somebody else said this:

And what non-sense it is too, because when you consider the finance, the running costs and maintenance, £190 is probably quite a lot of money when your monthly payments are equivalent to or often in excess of your mortgage/rent.

We don't know if this is the case here, but nobody forces you to buy a car that costs more than your mortgage/rent. Nobody forces you to live at the edge of your means such that £190 is more than an annoyance, but is pushing the OP towards breaking the law (and potentially even higher costs).