Childs Road bike claim

Astaroth

southernscouser wrote:

She would need a doctors cerificate as proof of her "injuries"!

Hopefully she will be prosecuted for falsely trying to obtain money by deception! Whiplash my !!!!!!. She should be ashamed of herself. Another !!!!!! out to get something for nothing! :mad:

She would need medical evidence to prove her whiplash injury. Depending on the extent of it it could be a simple GPs record for a very minor case or would be an independant consultants medical evidence report for anything more than minor.

Whilst it is probable that the woman is trying it on it is possible to sustain a whiplash type injury from performing an emergency stop (hence why driving examiners no longer lean forward to tap the dashboard to get the learner to do the emergency stops). As others have mentioned though the frequency of people claiming for the combination of whiplash and travel anxiety continues to grow rapidly.

To be honest though, at the moment there is a lot of speculation on this thread... simply because someone is saying they are talking legal advice doesnt mean that they will follow through with what they are taking advice on.... if it did I would probably be in court every week. :cool:

olister2k

There's some very good advice here, thank you all very much for taking the time to reply. I need to mull it over and wait till I hear from her solicitors.

JasonW_2

I forgot to ask before, at what point did she get the details of where you lived and your telephone number? Did your son give the details, or take her to the house? Also, if she came to the house and it looks like you have 'money to burn' instead of just wanting her car fixed, perhaps got greedy and made up these claims to try and get some more cash.

J

chris73

I don't wish to appear blunt, and your child is okay, which at the end of the day is all that matters but a third parties property has been damaged possibly through no fault of their own, why should they forfeit their rights to reimbursement?.

The OP has basically admitted on the first post that their child was at fault and caused the accident, and is honest enough to pay for the damage caused, and credit to them.

its just a real shame that other parents don't take the same attitude, instead of looking for ways to wriggle out of responsibility for their childrens actions.

Sorry, but I wouldn't lose my NCB and increase my insurance premium where the accident wasn't my fault either and would probably also pursue the matter too!.

Who knows, this girl may be struggling financially, and have saved up years for this car, only to have it damaged through an accident which wasn't their fault, and you begrudge her having the damage repaired??? - come on play fair.

I don't agree with the whiplash claim, nor that the damage runs to £800+ and yes, the other party is trying it on - however she may have legal protection on her insurance which could give her the means to take this further initially - although I reckon it'll be thrown out given the depth of the claim. I doubt that any insurance company would actively persue a claim for whiplash from a relatively low speed side impact from a cyclist!.

Have you seen the extent of the damage for yourself?, how many panels have been damaged and to what extent?. If the car is parked on a public road or non private area I would be very tempted to take some photos of the alleged damage first, in case she does pursue a mickey mouse claim. It seems possible that she is also trying to claim for old damage to the same side as your son hit!.

I'm no legal expert, but can't children now by held legally accountable for their actions from age 10?. I assume that the police attended the accident? and did they write a report?

southernscouser

chris73 wrote:

I don't wish to appear blunt, and your child is okay, which at the end of the day is all that matters but a third parties property has been damaged possibly through no fault of their own, why should they forfeit their rights to reimbursement?.

The OP has basically admitted on the first post that their child was at fault and caused the accident, and is honest enough to pay for the damage caused, its a shame that other parents don't take the same attitude, instead of looking for ways to wriggle out of responsibility for their childrens actions.

Who knows, this girl may be struggling financially, and have saved up years for this car, only to have it damaged through an accident which wasn't their fault, and you begrudge her having the damage repaired??? - come on play fair.

If you read the OP's first post she clearly say's "I felt responsible and thought the right thing to do was to pay for the damage to the car. I do not have home insurance cover. The girl has come back with quotes of £800 and £1000. The repair needed to my son's bike was £24."

Sounds like she is playing fair to me?

chris73 wrote:

I don't agree with the whiplash claim, nor that the damage runs to £800+ and yes, the other party is trying it on - however she may have legal protection on her insurance which could give her the means to take this further initially - although I reckon it'll be thrown out given the depth of the claim. I doubt that any insurance company would actively persue a claim for whiplash from a relatively low speed side impact from a cyclist!.

Have you seen the extent of the damage for yourself?, how many panels have been damaged and to what extent?. If the car is parked on a public road or non private area I would be tempted to take some photos of the alleged damage first, in case she does pursue it. It seems possible that she is also trying to claim for old damage to the same side as your son hit!.

As you have admitted, the claimant doesn't seem to be playing fair though. And I know two wrongs don't make a right but if someone was trying to screw me I'd [STRIKE]be very tempted[/STRIKE] screw them right back!

Poppy9

I would ask the car owner for details of her insurance company (as she has a duty to inform her insurers of any accidents whether she is at fault or not) and say you would prefer to deal with them. Her insurers will then arrange repair and will ensure only accident damage is repaired as they know they might end up with the bill if you don't pay. Also if she has sustained a physical injury you should ask her for a copy of the police accident report. If anyone is injured in a RTA they have to inform the police.

chris73

Sounds like she is playing fair to me?

If you read my post again perhaps you would realise that my tongue-in-cheek points were aimed towards other comments, which were basically looking for ways / excuses for the OP to wriggle out of ANY responsibility.

Forgetting what is and isn't law for a moment - If your child kicks a ball over a neighbours fence and it damages their property then its only fair (ethically and morally) is it not that you offer to pay up for the damage?. I don't see that there is much difference between that and this and perhaps many other examples?. Or maybe in the eyes of some it's okay for kids to do as much damage to other peoples property (accidentally or not) and the attitude is "Hey its okay! - they are only kids, claim off your own insurance!".

Sorry, but I don't agree with that philosophy!. Why do some believe that others should foot the bill for costs incurred / caused by other people or their offspring?

I've agreed (there is nothing to ADMIT to!) that the 3rd party is trying it on, however that doesn't negate the fact that *IF* the accident is not her fault that she is entitled to have the damage from this one incident repaired, even if its only £50. As you so correctly state, Two wrongs DO NOT make a right!.

I've already stated that I don't agree with the whiplash claim and I don't agree that the damage from this incident runs to £800 either!.

but if someone was trying to screw me I'd be very tempted screw them right back!

Thats fine, provided that you REALLY did believe that you were 100% in the right with no doubts, and had legal representation of the same opinion. But if right of way of the motorist was proven and the quotes that the third party has got are from an insurance approved garage and deemed accurate then by the time you had paid for your own legal advice you'd be severely out of pocket!. All the girl needs is a solicitor with the same opinion as me , and if she has got legal cover on her motor insurance then its not going to cost her anything to start the process rolling, it may even have been her own insurers who dictated where she obtained the quotes - with only one side of the story on the table, we can only assume that she hasn't contacted them for advice, quite possibly she has.

But if she is taking legal action and a socilitors letter is received then I suggest the OP does the same since advice on a forum does not constitute legal advice.

I know from reading other posts here, that the motorists are the lowest form of life to some, and many will consider that you cease having ANY RIGHTS, once you sit in a drivers seat. I also realise that the kid could have fallen from the sky and the motorist would still be tried and convicted on site and found to be at fault by any angry lynch mob gathering, but hey!, in this instance the girl may really NOT be at fault, and couldn't have done anything to avoid the cyclist as it sounds that she was already passing the junction at the time the cyclist emerged (side impact) and legally it would seem (from the vague description of the accident) that she has the full right of way.

I would ask the car owner for details of her insurance company (as she has a duty to inform her insurers of any accidents whether she is at fault or not) and say you would prefer to deal with them. Her insurers will then arrange repair and will ensure only accident damage is repaired as they know they might end up with the bill if you don't pay.

Sounds like the best advice so far!

southernscouser

chris73 wrote:

If you read my post properly perhaps you would realise that my comments were aimed to the others in this conversation, who were basically looking for ways to wriggle out of the original responsibility.

In that case I apologise but before you edited your post it wasn't that clear to me! :beer:

It was the bit directed at the OP that made me read it as in you were saying it to her.

"I don't wish to appear blunt, and your child is okay, which at the end of the day is all that matters but a third parties property has been damaged possibly through no fault of their own, why should they forfeit their rights to reimbursement?."

No harm done though!

southernscouser

chris73 wrote:

If your child kicks a ball over a neighbours fence and it damages their property then its only fair that you pay up for the damage?. I don't see that there is much difference between that and this and perhaps other examples?. Or maybe in the eyes of some it's okay for kids to do as much damage to other peoples property (intentional or not) and the attitude is "Hey its okay! - they are only kids".

Sorry, but I don't agree with that philosophy!.
far!

And I totally agree with you on that!