Bike left on ground behind car - now crushed!

adonis

Once it is sorted , make sure you cancel the paper delivery and tell the shop owner that he needs to employ boys that know how to park a bike and can be bothered to put lights on it.

zappahey

Honeydog wrote: »

You know an awful lot about that paperboy and what he did at exactly which moment - do you have CCTV?

It seems like half of the posters on this thread have access to CCTV, given how certain they are about what did and didn't happen.

Mim_2

Murtle wrote: »

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.

I'd feel the same if I hadn't checked properly but that's the point here - he DID check before he got into the car and can't be expected to have xray vision! He's annoyed for having to deal with something that wasn't his fault and I don't blame him.

I don't know how close the bike was to the car but it must have been central at the back of the car (VW Passat) as the scrapes to the car are in the middle. My son says the front wheel of the bike was facing the car and it was the handlebars that got jammed. He thinks it sort of 'flipped' the rear of the bike causing buckling to the rear of it.

And the reason I know so much of it is that no, I don't have CCTV or ESP! I asked the boy and my son lots of questions last night and again today but obviously didn't want to quote reams and reams of everything discussed here. My job involves making assessments and recommendations on people to come to informed decisions, and I suppose I'm conditioned to question things as closely as possible!

When it happened last night my son offered to take the bike home for him but the paperboy declined. He said that it was his fault for leaving it there and his mate was going to kill him, but he couldn't remember saying that when he called with his dad this morning. He was obviously very embarrassed and couldn't wait to get away last night.

As yet, the father isn't threatening any kind of legal action or has even asked for my son't name. He just asked if my son was willing to go 50:50 on repairs or replacement value. As I've said earlier, we don't feel my son is at fault, and his car is also damaged through no fault of his but he would be willing to pay say, 25% as a goodwill, neighbourly gesture. I'm just curious about how far it could go if the father refused anything less than he asked for.

WelshPaul

As much as i feel for your son he hit a stationary object, it is his fault.

You cannot check your surroundings before getting in a vehicle and say hay ho anything that happens after you get in a vehicle is not your problem.

Could be a case of driving without due care and attention.

colin79666

50:50 sounds fair to me.

pendulum

Mim wrote: »

25% as a goodwill, neighbourly gesture.

If he wasn't liable in law in any way, then paying 25% would be a goodwill gesture.

The fact is a court or insurer would likely pin between 50% and 100% of the blame on him, as the driver of a vehicle which moved off from a stationary position and drove over a stationary bike.

So you see, a 25% goodwill gesture isn't much of a goodwill gesture at all. It's more of an insult.

If the dad will settle for 50-50, then your son should accept this before it's too late.

stephen77

WelshPaul wrote: »

As much as i feel for your son he hit a stationary object, it is his fault.

You cannot check your surroundings before getting in a vehicle and say hay ho anything that happens after you get in a vehicle is not your problem.

Could be a case of driving without due care and attention.

Lets take it to a extreme.
Your sitting a traffic light and waiting for it to go green on a dark light with no street lights on.
I am wearing dark clothes and decide to slide some just infront of your rear car wheels. eg a skateboard.
WHen the lights go green you drive and break my skateboard.

who is at my fault?
personally i think its my own silly fault, however others would say the drivers fault based on the above comments that its the drivers responability.

vikingaero

I'm not sure on the level of blame to apportion, but maybe all those drivers who thinks the son is 100% liable, check underneath their cars before they set off for the children playing hide and seek.

mikey72

vikingaero wrote: »

I'm not sure on the level of blame to apportion, but maybe all those drivers who thinks the son is 100% liable, check underneath their cars before they set off for the children playing hide and seek.

I don't know if he's 100% liable, but it'll cost alot more than 50% of the bike's worth if his insurers get dragged in.
Even if he turns out 0% liable.

mcfisco

What the Highway Code says about reversing

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070340