Daughters horse hit a car

Flyboy152

mandragora wrote: »

If you're insured with NFU, you might get off scott free. That's what happened to me, when someone riding one horse and also leading a second horse at the same time pulled into a gateway, and waved me past. I drove slowly and carfeully by, giving as much room as was possible on the lane; one horse spooked the other, and the horse being led knocked back into my car and damaged the door and mirror. None of it was, according to the NFU the rider's fault at all, and I had to sort it all out myself. Bitter? Not me. It wasn't helped by the fact that I'd only had the car a couple of weeks.

I thought the law had changed, regarding liability.

Flyboy152

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

As you're obviously an expert on the highway code you'll be fully aware of that failure to observe the highway code can be used to establish liability. :whistle:

As I said in my post that by driving too close the driver could well be found to be at fault here. So there is no way the horse riders insurance would have to pay out 100%, probably 50/50 (in an ideal world 100% from the drivers side).

With the lack of independent witnesses, it would be impossible to prove.

Flyboy152

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

catch 22. if the car didnt drive too close and kept to the highway code then his car wouldnt have been damaged when the horse was spooked.

How close is "too close?"

highway code just a guide dont make me laugh what world do you live in? obviously not ours. if you dont drive to the highway code YOU DONT BELONG ON THE ROAD.

Well, it certainly isn't a piece of legislation, is it.

Flyboy152

Hintza wrote: »

OP do nothing until you inform your insurer. They might not even accept liability. The car driver will have to claim negligence on the part of the rider to have any chance of winning a claim.

Having said that you might feel a moral duty to help pay something towards the drivers costs.

I don't think is is the case any longer.

Flyboy152

photome wrote: »

I keep reading about the horse kicking the car. It didnt, it backed in to the car !

Well....I don't think the damage was caused by the horse's tail swishing the car door, do you?

Flyboy152

Littlemissteapot wrote: »

IMO - It's not your fault, the driver is at fault 100% as they were overtaking and it is the responsibilty of the person overtaking to ensure that they do so safely and without incident. So, I wouldn't pay or agree to anything yet and go to CAB to find out your legal rights. There's no need to pay 300 quid if a free trip to the CAB could save you that.

Also IMO: The driver caused the accident. The horse denting the car door was the result.

I really do despair at some people's understanding of the rules of the road, I really do. :wall:

Flyboy152

Hintza wrote: »

Horses are more likely to frequent B roads and more particularly unlassified roads. These are roads that are more likely to have tractors, horses and other livestock and as such drivers should be expecting the unexpected.

Some of us still live in areas where it is common to have sheep all over the place. Kept off the A roads normally by cattle grids and the like

Nonsense.

Drivers shouldn't have to expect anything more than the normal day-to-day hazards they would normally experience. If a tractor, horse or even a spaceship happens to block the road, it would be the operator/rider/astronaut's responsibility to make sure that they behave in a responsible manner.

Flyboy152

Bigmoney2 wrote: »

Road tax is actually vehicle excise duty and is determined by the vehicles C02 emmissions, so some cars are exempt due to their low emmisions rate, horses and cyclists would also fall into this bracket. It is not a tax for using the road.
Jules

Have a guess at the gas emissions from the "exhaust" of a horse.

Lum

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Have a guess at the gas emissions from the "exhaust" of a horse.

If the horse was born prior to March 2001, do they tax it based on stomach size rather than how much it farts?

Flyboy152

Littlemissteapot wrote: »

I see your view but disagree slightly. You should not overtake when you might come into conflict with other road users (Highway code 167 and 215). Clearly the driver came into conflict with the horse whilst overtaking. So my view is still 100% the drivers responsibility as you should only overtake when it is safe to do so. It seems he mis-judged how safe it was to overtake that particular horse/rider as well as the gap he should have given the horse in order to make a safe overtaking manoeuver.

How much of a gap did the driver give the OP's daughter's horse?