son hit neighbours car

Teddy_KGB

newcook wrote: »

As for young adults in the household – if they can afford to buy, run and maintain a car they can afford to live somewhere that has parking.

That is just such a ridiculous statement! :rotfl:

carolan78

elvis86 wrote: »

Yes, and if I was able to identify who had caused such damage I wouldn't hesitate to pursue them for the cost of repairing it!

Chances are though they are well gone by the time you return to your car. Don't you accept that these things can happen and are part of been a car owner?

elvis86

carolan78 wrote: »

Chances are though they are well gone by the time you return to your car. Don't you accept that these things can happen and are part of been a car owner?

Of course, when someone scrapes a shopping trolley down the side of your car, they don't stick around to swap insurance details. But in the OP's situation, the car owner does know who damaged his car.

I absolutely don't accept that I should have to supervise my car at all times to ensure that nobody damages it, else accept that other people's careless attitude towards my property is "part of being a car owner".

Would you apply the same logic to your house? Should you have guard it 24/7 or accept that possibly being burgled is "part of being a homeowner"? If your neighbour embarks on building work and accidentally disturbs the foundations of your house, bringing it crashing down around your ears, would you shrug your shoulders and accept that "accidents happen"?

Yes, accidents happen. But if another driver rear-ended me by accident, I would fully expect their insurance to cover any costs incurred by me. And vice versa. There's a difference between accepting that accidents happen and suggesting that we should live in a world with no culpability for anything.

Mids_Costcutter

newcook wrote: »

The OP has said that there wasn’t much space to get through and she has been and taken photos of this.

What if someone in a wheelchair wanted to get through? They cant just maneuver into the road then hop back up the curb once they have passed the car – they need to find somewhere along the road where the curb has dropped then travel in the road until they get to the next dropped curb so they can get back to the safety of the pavement.

While I don’t have a car, my housemate does – when we were looking for somewhere to live one of the main factors was she had somewhere to park.

As for young adults in the household – if they can afford to buy, run and maintain a car they can afford to live somewhere that has parking.

Perhaps better to say afford to rent a parking space e.g. a garage somewhere nearby?

elvis86

Mids_Costcutter wrote: »

Perhaps better to say afford to rent a parking space e.g. a garage somewhere nearby?

Yes, because there is an ample supply of garages and parking spaces for rent. Enough for every car in the country. Get real.

Lirin

If I was the owner of the car- and I am a massive car nut- I'd probably take it on the chin as things happen. It's annoying, but happens. I have a couple of minor dents on my car from kids playing with footballs- they play in the parking area behind the cars. If I was the parent, I'd like to think I'd offer to pay.

The whole argument about whether you should/shouldn't etc is a bit ambiguous- different circumstances lead to different situations.

newcook

Teddy_KGB wrote: »

That is just such a ridiculous statement! :rotfl:

how exactly is it ridiculous?!

if an adult living with their parents wants to buy a car but doesnt have anywhere to park it that is their problem and a solution would be for them to get their own place and park the car there. I dont get why some adults still feel the need to still live with their parents in their mid 20's anyway but thats another subject!

elvis86

newcook wrote: »

how exactly is it ridiculous?!

if an adult living with their parents wants to buy a car but doesnt have anywhere to park it that is their problem and a solution would be for them to get their own place and park the car there. I dont get why some adults still feel the need to still live with their parents in their mid 20's anyway but thats another subject!

But they often do have somewhere to park it..on the road outside their house, possibly half on the pavement if the road is narrow.:D

Whilst I too, can't comprehend why folk in their mid 20s would still want to live with their parents, often they have little choice, and to say that anyone who can afford a car can afford a place of their own is ridiculous.

For example, my sister is 21 and lives with my parents. She works as a hairdresser in a salon about 6 miles away and earns about £180 a week. Rent on a 1 bed flat around there is at least £400 a month, so it's not really a possibility.

However, to get to work by public transport would entail a 20 minute walk, 3 buses and another 10 minute walk (my parents live in the sticks). So she has a little runabout which she parks on the street outside my parents' house (halfway on the pavement to allow the neighbours' cars to pass by).

She's doing her best to earn a living, unlike many of her peers, and yet you're actually suggesting that she should either spend the best part of 3 hours commuting each day, or live in a flat and not have a life, just to avoid parking her car half on the pavement in a cul-de-sac and causing the odd person with a buggy to have to skirt around it..?

Perhaps she should just have done with it, give up working and pop out a couple of sprogs herself? A fair few unemployed single mothers hof her age probably wouldn't get out of bed for £180 a week.

carolan78

elvis86 wrote: »

Of course, when someone scrapes a shopping trolley down the side of your car, they don't stick around to swap insurance details. But in the OP's situation, the car owner does know who damaged his car.

I absolutely don't accept that I should have to supervise my car at all times to ensure that nobody damages it, else accept that other people's careless attitude towards my property is "part of being a car owner".

Would you apply the same logic to your house? Should you have guard it 24/7 or accept that possibly being burgled is "part of being a homeowner"? If your neighbour embarks on building work and accidentally disturbs the foundations of your house, bringing it crashing down around your ears, would you shrug your shoulders and accept that "accidents happen"?

Yes, accidents happen. But if another driver rear-ended me by accident, I would fully expect their insurance to cover any costs incurred by me. And vice versa. There's a difference between accepting that accidents happen and suggesting that we should live in a world with no culpability for anything.

I don't expect to be burgled but I know there's a good chance I may be burgled which is why I have home insurance. Where did I suggest you have to guard your car? All I said is as a car owner I have accepted the fact that no matter how careful I am with it others may not be and dents/scratches (minor damage) may occur. After all it is parked outside for the world and elements to get to.

The only way you can guarantee something like a car is not going to be damaged in some way would be to keep it garaged and never drive it. After all you get stonechips ect from the roads. In the context of the op's situation I think the neighbour is wrong to knock on the door and ask for the money. Whilst I accept he may have felt he was making a traffic situation better by parking half on the pavement he also has to accept he made it difficult for others to pass his vehicle.

No doubt the 6 year old had been told in no uncertain terms not to go on the road (I know mine would have been) so going around the car for him would not have been an option. I can see your argument regarding the parking but you also have to accept there is another side to that argument.

Our street as I said earlier is a cul de sac with no paths, my children don't leave the garden yet because of this. If we had paths my 5 year old would be able to go to her friends a few doors down. I can't allow her to though because even though we are a small residential street you always get none residents driving down the narrow roads far to quickly and not knowing the street they don't know where to look for children/pedestrians.

RacyRed

elvis86 wrote: »

But they often do have somewhere to park it..on the road outside their house, possibly half on the pavement if the road is narrow.:D

Whilst I too, can't comprehend why folk in their mid 20s would still want to live with their parents, often they have little choice, and to say that anyone who can afford a car can afford a place of their own is ridiculous.

For example, my sister is 21 and lives with my parents. She works as a hairdresser in a salon about 6 miles away and earns about £180 a week. Rent on a 1 bed flat around there is at least £400 a month, so it's not really a possibility.

However, to get to work by public transport would entail a 20 minute walk, 3 buses and another 10 minute walk (my parents live in the sticks). So she has a little runabout which she parks on the street outside my parents' house (halfway on the pavement to allow the neighbours' cars to pass by).

She's doing her best to earn a living, unlike many of her peers, and yet you're actually suggesting that she should either spend the best partof 3 hours commuting each day, or live in a flat and not have a life, just to avoid parking her car half on the pavement in a cul-de-sac and causing the odd person with a buggy to have to skirt around it..?

Perhaps she should just have done with it, give up working and pop out a couple of sprogs herself? A fair few unemployed single mothers hof her age probably wouldn't get out of bed for £180 a week.

Elvis, please do something for yourself and the rest of us.

Go borrow a child's buggy, load it with a few kilos of shopping and try negotiating it up a street where there are cars parked on the pavement.

Or a wheelchair
Or a pair of crutches
or a guide dog
or a loaded shopping trolley
or a walking stick
or even just a few heavy bags of shopping - 2 bags in each hand please.
or any of the many other circumstances where a pedestrian might be unable to squeeze past a car partially parked on the pavement.

By your own admission, all of your family park on the kerb outside their home, so it isn't just one car, is it, and I'm sure your family have neighbours doing the same, don't they? There is no offstreet parking, so there won't be any dropped kerbs, will there. So how many times would you have to get you and your burden over the kerb into the road and back again if you have to walk most of the length of the street?

Go on Elvis, please try it, then come back and talk to us again.