I Hit A Dog With My Car - Advice On Court Action

sunnyone

propaintballa wrote: »

Thanks bud. I'm actually so surprised at this forum, as i was on here a while back when i had a parking ticket and people were generally helpful, and i helped some people with computer issues. But jesus, some of the replies here are astonishing.

A parking ticket and a dead dog in a year and a bit of driving, something to be very proud of.

propaintballa wrote: »

I have been in contact with him, this is when he told me that he had no money to pay for it and then intended to borrow £100 to give me... Which doesn't really help me much, but it's £100 towards to 7-£800 that i'm ending up paying with doing all the work myself. It's been a month now and i've missed university open days etc because i don't want to drive the car as it is, which is rather annoying.

Also having to cancel a number of other events i had planed such as the military training simulation at Copehill Down... -Sigh-

Its very childish not to use the car because its bashed, its hardly undriveable is it?

propaintballa wrote: »

Yes this is possible... I will speak to my Mum tomorrow about it because i really need my money back!

Not sure if this would mean me losing out on my no claims if they fail to recover the money, i'll call tomorrow and ask...

If you need your mum to make your mind up for you your very immature and shouldnt be driving.

A speed limit is the maximum speed you are legally allowed to use and not the minimum or target speed, the beaches on your photos would attract families and you should be taking care when driving along this road.

That said the dog owner needs to take responsibility for the damage if what you say is true, dogs shouldnt be allowed to run free near roads and a claim on your insurance will affect you for years to come and thats not right.

tandraig

I think the OP is a liar - if you read the first post again then subsequent posts - i do not believe a word this person says.
so, I am not wasting any more of my time on here. bye

propaintballa

sunnyone wrote: »

A parking ticket and a dead dog in a year and a bit of driving, something to be very proud of.



Its very childish not to use the car because its bashed, its hardly undriveable is it?



If you need your mum to make your mind up for you your very immature and shouldnt be driving.

A speed limit is the maximum speed you are legally allowed to use and not the minimum or target speed, the beaches on your photos would attract families and you should be taking care when driving along this road.

That said the dog owner needs to take responsibility for the damage if what you say is true, dogs shouldnt be allowed to run free near roads and a claim on your insurance will affect you for years to come and thats not right.

Don't be so naive, i'm sure being on this website you would have seen a lot about PPCs... I parked in a near empty car park for 15 mins over the time... So got a ticket...

What's wrong with asking my parents for advice? I didn't realise they taught drivers how to take legal action when taking the practical driving test?

And bloody hell... Just don't assume you know the road, because you obviously don't... It's not the kind of beach that kiddies run around on, certainly not in February at 8 in the morning. And i know exactly what a speed LIMIT is tank you very much, so take your patronising attitude elsewhere, because i really don't have time for you.

Families may well one day be along that road, but the fact of the matter is, they weren't... I have done nothing wrong in going to speed limit... So don't come here and try and scrutinise me for doing nothing wrong? Or are you one of those people that drive at 60 on motorways and are more likely to cause a crash then anyone else?

Sunnyday

I feel for both parties involved in this.

The OP shouldn`t have to pay and also the man with the rescued dog will no doubt be grieving and feeling awful about both the dog and the car.

Have you actually asked if the dog had any insurance from the rescue?
Some rescued dogs are automatically insured from the time of adoption for six months. It is worth asking the owner as he may not even realise and it may be in the adoption paperwork somewhere.

I do understand completely re the OP not wanting to claim on his insurance due to the premium increase BUT if it had been a child and not a dog then the claim would have been on his insurance and not against the parent of the deceased child (I hope)
A child chasing a ball could have easily been in the place of the dog, especially if the road was alongside a beach .:(

SD

propaintballa

tandraig wrote: »

I think the OP is a liar - if you read the first post again then subsequent posts - i do not believe a word this person says.
so, I am not wasting any more of my time on here. bye

Why don't you believe me? I would love to hear your reasoning... Seeing as you haven't actually stated your basis of that comment.

propaintballa

Sunnyday wrote: »

I feel for both parties involved in this.

The OP shouldn`t have to pay and also the man with the rescued dog will no doubt be grieving and feeling awful about both the dog and the car.

Have you actually asked if the dog had any insurance from the rescue?
Some rescued dogs are automatically insured from the time of adoption for six months. It is worth asking the owner as he may not even realise and it may be in the adoption paperwork somewhere.

I do understand completely re the OP not wanting to claim on his insurance due to the premium increase BUT if it had been a child and not a dog then the claim would have been on his insurance and not against the parent of the deceased child (I hope)
A child chasing a ball could have easily been in the place of the dog, especially if the road had beach on either side.:(

SD

What some people don't seem to understand is that i would have seen a child moving at a fraction of the speed towards to road, therefore would have been able to stop... However, a dog sprinting out of a ditch at 45 mph... I don't think so. I wouldn't have even been able to stop iff i was going half the speed as the dog moved so quickly.

mikey72

Sunnyday wrote: »

I feel for both parties involved in this.

The OP shouldn`t have to pay and also the man with the rescued dog will no doubt be grieving and feeling awful about both the dog and the car.

Have you actually asked if the dog had any insurance from the rescue?
Some rescued dogs are automatically insured from the time of adoption for six months. It is worth asking the owner as he may not even realise and it may be in the adoption paperwork somewhere.

I do understand completely re the OP not wanting to claim on his insurance due to the premium increase BUT if it had been a child and not a dog then the claim would have been on his insurance and not against the parent of the deceased child (I hope)
A child chasing a ball could have easily been in the place of the dog, especially if the road was alongside a beach .:(

SD

It's a 60 limit, if you think the council is wrong, get a petition raised, and get the limit changed. It's nothing to do with the op.

Paulie'sGirl

Hey OP,

Sorry to see your pride and joy was damaged. I know what its like to be young and proud of your first car. Some people on here are a little jaded and can't think back that far!

Car accidents are an unfortunate reality of driving, but at the end of the day, as my dad says, every one you walk away from is a good one. Could have been a lot worse!

I would advise speaking to your insurer about claiming against the owner. They may choose to see this as a "non-fault" accident, which may not impact your premium and no-claims status. Its certainly worth discussing with them.

Additionally, if you live with your parents, see if they have legal cover on their home insurance? That sort of cover is for a wide range of legal issues, not just home-related ones.

Best of luck

PGxx

Sunnyday

propaintballa wrote: »

What some people don't seem to understand is that i would have seen a child moving at a fraction of the speed towards to road, therefore would have been able to stop... However, a dog sprinting out of a ditch at 45 mph... I don't think so. I wouldn't have even been able to stop iff i was going half the speed as the dog moved so quickly.

I think that evasive action would have been a natural instinct if i saw anything moving towards the road out of the corner of my eye.

Stopping for anything and avoiding a collision would have been a priority as that is what i was taught by my ADI, i`ve only been driving myself for around 3 years but i always remember what was drilled into me by the instructor.

Don`t get me wrong i`m not slating you for your actions but can`t help thinking of the "what if`s"

SD

DaveF327

propaintballa wrote: »

Would love to meet someone like you on real life.

Yeah, preferably at 60mph on that road :rotfl:

sunnyone wrote: »

the beaches on your photos would attract families and you should be taking care when driving along this road.

Not another one. Assuming the OP looked at the open beaches, saw no families and no supersonic children, then he took as much care as he needed to under the circumstances. You can only judge the circumstances at the time. Even advanced driving textbooks advise to plan for what can reasonably be expected to happen.