Our slates damaged next door's car.....

shockingmoment

Storm damage. Our insurer is happy to pay for our damage, but has stated that the neighbours should claim on their own car insurance for the damage to their car.

Not told them yet. Guess they won't be happy. I'll probably offer to pay their excess.

Is this common practice?

marcellep

shockingmoment wrote:

Storm damage. Our insurer is happy to pay for our damage, but has stated that the neighbours should claim on their own car insurance for the damage to their car.

Not told them yet. Guess they won't be happy. I'll probably offer to pay their excess.

Is this common practice?

I assume that they have fully comprehensive insurance, If this is the case they should claim on there own policy. Another option if you like your neighbour is to offer to pay for the damage. Either way its there claim.

clear_blu

Yes.
This is quite normal, if your roof was in a good state of repair then it is an act of God and there is no liability on you or your insurer.
You do not even have to pay their excess, but I suppose it is a nice gesture and may keep them as good neighbours.

Techno

Just a thought - What happens if they only have 3rd party as some people do. Our neighbours shed roof landed on our car - fortunately it was plastic and didn't do any damage but if it had I wouldn't have been too chuffed at having to pay a £100 excess and potentially losing my no claims bonus I know it wasn't their fault but it wasn't mine either!
I thought most house insurance policies have public liability cover but they'll do anything to get out of paying

mattymoo

Techno wrote:

Just a thought - What happens if they only have 3rd party as some people do. Our neighbours shed roof landed on our car - fortunately it was plastic and didn't do any damage but if it had I wouldn't have been too chuffed at having to pay a £100 excess and potentially losing my no claims bonus I know it wasn't their fault but it wasn't mine either!
I thought most house insurance policies have public liability cover but they'll do anything to get out of paying

Its not the insurers getting out of paying.
Public liability cover is designed to pay out for your liabilities to your neighbours / visitors etc under English (or Scottish) law.
Your neighbour has to prove you were negligent and that they suffered a loss as a result. They can prove a loss, but they would be hard pushed to prove you were negligent if your roof was in good repair prior to the storms.

It would have been tough luck on you.

lisyloo

Just a thought - What happens if they only have 3rd party as some people do.

Providing the slates falling off was an "act of God" i.e. caused be extreme weather rather than negligence then it's up to the car owner to repair their own car.
If they haven't got insurance then it's down to them to pay for repairs.

Insurance is not the same as liability.

I personally have 3rd party insurance only on my car as it's an old banger.
If anything like that happens (and no-one is to blame) then I have to pay for it myself.
If they (or I) don't like that then they should purchase insurance.

Astaroth

Techno wrote:

I thought most house insurance policies have public liability cover but they'll do anything to get out of paying

The key bit to what is covered is in the name - "liability"

dictionary wrote:

the state of being legally obliged and responsible

How do you think the OP is responsible for what happened? Did they cause the storm? Did they direct the wind to blow towards their neighbours car?

The only way you can get liability in these cases is where you have acted negligently - ie you know your roof is in a terrible state and you have done nothing about it.

Liability insurance in theory would be for if a person sued you in court the insurance company would pay the amount the court awarded the other party. Given court costs money and insurers are probably better at arguing law than the average person they naturally will take over handling the claim from the outset.

lisyloo

The key bit to what is covered is in the name - "liability"

This is correct.
As an individual you are only liable for something you do negligently or as deliberate act.
You are not liable for something that "just happens".

For example if you were to open your windows on a hot day and the sudden music from your house startled a horse which threw the rider then you would not be liable because you were not negligent.

Accidents and "acts of God" like weather just happen sometimes and there isn't always someone to blame.

The weather last week was extreme, so it doesn't mean that householders are to blame or liable because slates fall off their roof.

It's up to car holders to have their own insurance.
I have 3rd party only but that's MY choice and I understand the risks.

Of course if someone had a run down property that they had failed to maintain and had been warned about repeatedly then that would be different.

Techno

Ah -so flying roof tiles are like cats - they can do what they like on other people's property and the owner isn't responsible!!! Seriously though, I always thought that this sort of thing was covered by the public liability part of your insurance - you learn something new everyday on this site

clear_blu

Just as an aside there was talk around 20 years ago about introducing 'No Fault' insurance. That is where it was not necessary to prove negligence.
Anyone know what was the outcome of the discussions..........???
Sorry we know what the outcome was but does anyone know why were the proposals not adopted...........??

shockingmoment

Two adjacent semi's - cars parkd between the semi's. this bit is really not in dispute - the evidence is very very clear!

I'm going to pay his insurance excess as I do feel somewhat responsible - he'd do the same if it was the orther way round. He's going to lose some NCB afterall.

It does seem unfair though.

Thanks everyone for your comments - I do appreciate them.