Bike left on ground behind car - now crushed!

FATBALLZ

Honeydog wrote: »

Just found this http://www.holymoly.com/football-news/frank-lampard-reverses-over-14-year-olds-bike-gives-him-%C2%A3200-apology50260

For folk who can't be bothered to click the link

On yer bike

Fri, 30/04/2010 - 10:30


Frank Lampard thought he'd killed a teenage boy yesterday when he felt a nasty bump reversing in a London street. Luckily for him, it was just the boy's bike he destroyed, rather than his life. And instead of slamming on the gas and fleeing the scene, Lamps emptied his wallet and handed the starstruck lad two hundred quid to replace it...


Tis from a celeb gossip site tho found via Google.

Interesting though that is I think Mr Lampard would be more inclined to pay up given the negative PR if he didn't and the fact that £200 is about 20 minutes wages for him, actual liability probably didn't cross his mind.

The situation under discussion sounds pretty 50/50 to me - I'm struggling to picture how this could have happened without both parties being a bit careless. If the car is damaged I wouldn't pay anything, if the bike is damaged maybe offer half of the cost (what it's worth, not cost of a brand new bike). That's only based on what's said in this thread, only the OPs son really knows how liable he actually is, nobody here knows all the facts.

mikey72

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

If your son decides to play hardball. How exactly does the paperboy expect to prove what happened?

How does the son?

It'll still be a loss of ncd, zero payment, if nothing else.

Murtle

I'm sorry, no matter how many times I read this I can't work out why you don't think it's your sons fault.

FATBALLZ

Murtle wrote: »

I'm sorry, no matter how many times I read this I can't work out why you don't think it's your sons fault.

So if you left an item in the road right behind a car you wouldn't feel the slightest bit that it's your own fault if it got crushed? What if the paper boy had left broken bottles behind the car, who's fault would that be if the car tyres got popped?

stephen77

How far behind your son car was the bike?
i.e. was it right up next to the boot so side view mirrors not helped?

Did the bike have lights on if being cycled on the road at night time? Not sure if this legally effect anything though.

C_Mababejive

The other day i saw a lad on a bike pulling up outside a shop. He casually dropped it on its side roight outside the door so that he wouldnt have to walk to far (poor lamb).

Had someone walked out the door,flipped over said bike and cracked their skull/fractured their wrist in a fall...whos fault would that be?

Biggles

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

If your son decides to play hardball. How exactly does the paperboy expect to prove what happened?

He has only to show his bike. The damage was hardly likely to have been caused by him ramming the car.

Murtle

FATBALLZ wrote: »

So if you left an item in the road right behind a car you wouldn't feel the slightest bit that it's your own fault if it got crushed? What if the paper boy had left broken bottles behind the car, who's fault would that be if the car tyres got popped?

If I ran it over I would feel that it was more my fault for not checking properly. I'd be annoyed, but deal with it.

stephen77

Biggles wrote: »

He has only to show his bike. The damage was hardly likely to have been caused by him ramming the car.

BUt proving its his car in question.

Okay this should be quite easy for forensics. But this is accident with no injury are, the boy was not on his bike. So probably not near the top of the investigation list unless his dad is a police officer.

Honeydog

pendulum wrote: »

The paperboy claims differently. The paperboy says your son wasn't in the car when he put the bike down. That makes sense, because you wouldn't normally place a bike down behind a car which had people in it, but you might place a bike down behind a parked car for a few seconds if there were no people inside.

If you're saying the paperboy's a liar, then I'm surprised he would tell that lie. If he was going to lie he could have claimed your son reversed into the road and knocked him off his bike.

Believe it or not, an insurance company isn't going to take your sons view as gospel. They will listen to both sides and then decide, and the likely result is a loss of NCB and a nice new bike for the kid involved.

Agreed - that's why I reckon he'd be better settling on whatever terms seems fair to everyone involved that way he doesn't have to go through the insurance at all.