Bike left on ground behind car - now crushed!

Mim_2

Hi

Yesterday evening (in the dark) my son was in his parked car outside our house and the paperboy was delivering the papers to some houses at the same time. My son reversed to allow himself room to go but didn't know that the paperboy had left a bike lying on the road behind his car. My son reversed over it and it was badly damaged. He immediately stopped and disentangled it and the paperboy apologised and said that he'd borrowed it from his who would now go mad at him.

This morning a note has been left through our door from the paperboy's dad saying that he'll be coming around later for payment for the bike. But it's not my son's fault! It was impossible for him to see a bike lying in the road directly behind his car. Surely it's the paperboy's responsibility. Obviously his friend's parents have told him he's got to pay for it.

I'm just wondering what I should tell his dad when he comes here and should I give him my son's name if he asks?

Thanks

maninthestreet

Your son drove over a stationary object - of course it's his fault.

colin79666

It's your sons fault. At the end of the day the car driver is responsible for any stationary object that gets hit. (I'm a car driver myself).

I'd suggest you have a reasoned discussion with the other party. As said the paperboy was a bit stupid to leave the bike directly behind the car so I'd suggest your son pays up but not the full amount for a replacement.

You should be thankful it was the bike and not the paperboy!

sequence

It's your sons fault. Really stupid to leave your bike behind someones car though. Paper boy is not likely to have bike worth more than £300 surely? Most likely it's a £70 argos job, so the damage shouldn't be too bad ?

Mim_2

But he was already in the car when the paperboy left the bike behind it. Obviously he'd checked that there was nothing behind when he first got in it and I don't see how he can be responsible if the bike was dropped there in the few seconds before reversing.

opinions4u

Mim wrote: »

But he was already in the car when the paperboy left the bike behind it. Obviously he'd checked that there was nothing behind when he first got in it and I don't see how he can be responsible if the bike was dropped there in the few seconds before reversing.

So if a 3 year old had toddled past at that moment, does he have no responsibility?

Time to get out of denial mode.

Mim_2

I get what you're saying in that he would be responsible for hitting something/someone in the sense that it was him driving and so him who hit it/them. But I'm talking about legal responsibility. If someone hits a person who runs out in front of or behind their car, legally they're not responsible for the accident - it's the legal fault of the person who didn't pay attention to what they were doing. If he'd have hit that bike because of inattention or it was 100% his fault he'd have offered to sort something out there and then. But what else could he have done in this situation? He'd checked the car was clear for driving and couldn't anticipate that someone was going to drop a black bike without lights behind the car in the dark just as he was about to reverse.

Hintza

I hear what you are saying OP (and I would be hacked off) but I think it will fall under "Sods Law". I think i woul be looking for a 50:50 (or so) on this. Boy was obviously:-

a/ littering
b/ obstructing the highway



Not sure how this would go if it went to court, but if the father is reasonable and sees a bit of culpability then just chat it through and see if you can come to some agreement.

Take age of bike into consideration especially if he plays hardball.

Notmyrealname

Tell the father you'll counter claim for damage to the car bodywork. All the holier than thous are bleating on about "what if it was a kid" etc but there is a big difference. A kid is taller and likely to be a moving object.

A reasonable person would not be expect someone to know there had been an object placed behind them in the time between checking and getting in the vehicle if the object was completely hidden from the drivers seat. The driver had already made all the checks required of him.

The paperboy had as much responsibility to place the bicycle in a safe place as the driver did to check. The driver checked and the paperboy obviously was in too much of a rush to bother to consider the possible outcome of putting a bike behind a car that someone had got in and turned the lights and/or engine on.

If it went to court that would be the view taken by the judge.

Honeydog

Some of those BMX bikes are quite expensive - if it was one of those.

Can't believe anyone else hasn't suggested it but - claim on insurance? The same way as if he'd reversed into another car instead of just a bike!



Disclaimer
This information is solely for the OP. I am not prepared to discuss it with anyone I have on ignore (as per MSE Andrea's request).Clear?

geri1965_2

Don't forget that any liability is limited to the second hand value of the bike, not a new one. I'd offer them £50.