Dog ran into road and damage car

Sgt_Pepper_2

TrickyWicky wrote: »

So despite your colleague hitting the owners dog and killing it, I suppose you want the owner of the dog that your colleague killed to now pay for the damage to the vehicle right?

What would have happened if it was a fox? You and your colleague are sick. The dog owner has just lost a pet thanks to your colleagues driving and all you care about is getting the money from them for something your colleague did.

Thats just wrong and if t were me, your colleague would be receiving a moneyclaim for the loss of the animal.

You'd lose your claim then.

The law whether you agree with it or not sides with the car driver in this case.

TrickyWicky

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

You'd lose your claim then.

The law whether you agree with it or not sides with the car driver in this case.

Spoken like robocop himself

atrixblue.-MFR-.

TrickyWicky wrote: »

So despite your colleague hitting the owners dog and killing it, I suppose you want the owner of the dog that your colleague killed to now pay for the damage to the vehicle right?

What would have happened if it was a fox? You and your colleague are sick. The dog owner has just lost a pet thanks to your colleagues driving and all you care about is getting the money from them for something your colleague did.

Thats just wrong and if t were me, your colleague would be receiving a moneyclaim for the loss of the animal.

hold on tricky, thats out of order.

every dog owner/or guardian is responsable for its actions, the dogs actions as a result of the walker letting it off the lead to run into traffic and get itself killed and cause damage to a vehicle boils down to negligence.

iv had a cat dart out from the field by my home directly under the cars front tyre, it happened in a second on nothing i could control cars dont stop on a pins head!!!.

this would be a different story had the dog caused a fatal head on accident with a HGV and the OP's colleague with him having to swerve into it.

and yes because the dog caused damage the negligant party is responsable!.

the facts are, it WAS on a lead, the guardian for no good reason other than to let it stretch its legs let it free, it caused an accident as a result fo setting it free, the down side a PET ( a member of a family) got killed and caused damage as a result of being let off that lead by its guardian.

and fox's are wild animals they have no owners, and its impossible to control a cats actions and there is no law that requirs its owner to be rsponsable for them wich cannot be said for a DOG who can be trained, walked on a lead and kept under control by its "responsable owner/guardian"


if you were in this situ and you were top put a counter claim for the cost of the dog and vet fee's etc, the judge would laugh you out the room.
1. youd have no valid claim against the driver.
3 your claim would be against the person who let it loose.

"counter claim or claim thrown out" laughs the judge.

same would happen if the op colleague brought a claim against the owner laugh it out of court because the person negligant isnt present or claimed against, the negligant party must be claimed from and thats the dogs guardian at the time the incident occured.

londonTiger

TrickyWicky wrote: »

So despite your colleague hitting the owners dog and killing it, I suppose you want the owner of the dog that your colleague killed to now pay for the damage to the vehicle right?

What would have happened if it was a fox? You and your colleague are sick. The dog owner has just lost a pet thanks to your colleagues driving and all you care about is getting the money from them for something your colleague did.

Thats just wrong and if t were me, your colleague would be receiving a moneyclaim for the loss of the animal.

i really domnt understand how some people get attached to animals like this. I would understand your attitude of it was a child that was run over and killed, in a way that it's completely not at fault of the driver. e.g. child playing tag sprints straight onto the road to avoid getting tagged and thus killed. It would be insensitive to then chase up the parent/family immediately after for the damage to the car.

BUT. It's a !!!!!!! animal. There has to be someone psychologically wrong with "animal lovers" who treat animals like humans. Pets are replacable, you shouldn't need time off work be bereave over your dog. Sure I would be bummed out if my cat died. I'd have memories of my cat and stop and think about my cat often, but it wouldn't stop me living my life. It would not stop me from carrying out my responsibilities.

Anyway; rant over.

OP your isssue is with the dog walker not the owner. Just like if a teenager was driving their parents car and got into the accident. You wouldn't chase after the car owner, yo'd chase after the driver/

vaio

londonTiger wrote: »

i really domnt understand how some people get attached to animals like this. ....blah blah blah......

Whilst I wouldn't compare the loss of a child to the loss of a dog if you can't understand how people get attached to pets then I think that's a gap in your knowledge rather than a fault elsewhere.

custardy

TrickyWicky wrote: »

So despite your colleague hitting the owners dog and killing it, I suppose you want the owner of the dog that your colleague killed to now pay for the damage to the vehicle right?

What would have happened if it was a fox? You and your colleague are sick. The dog owner has just lost a pet thanks to your colleagues driving and all you care about is getting the money from them for something your colleague did.

Thats just wrong and if t were me, your colleague would be receiving a moneyclaim for the loss of the animal.

That is the owners right to try,they wont get it though

what ifs dont matter. what if a driver nearly kills me and Im left injured for life while they drive off and leave me.
no claim for me
had I got a registration or the had stopped. I would have likely got a payout
so what ifs are great,but here its about liability

maxheadroom

Consequences could have been much worse

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/four-killed-in-nsw-highway-crash/story-fn3dxiwe-1226523345774

photome

vaio wrote: »

Whilst I wouldn't compare the loss of a child to the loss of a dog if you can't understand how people get attached to pets then I think that's a gap in your knowledge rather than a fault elsewhere.

You have hit nail on the head

photome

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

the claim is against the negligant party (the dog walker/sitter) not the owner.

the owner may have liability insurance for her DOG under her pet insurance, that would cover her for these kinds of things, but the avoidance is suggesting they dont, and quite rightly they dont have to acknowladge you as they are not the negligeant party.

if your friend walked you dog, let it off the lead, and the dog got run over due to it not being under control, who would you lay blame to? i would blame my friend, and ask him to cover the vet costs, and any other costs of damages the dog caused because he chose to let it off the lead.

Problem with that analagy is the owner may have told the walker not to use a lead

harveybobbles

londonTiger wrote: »

i really domnt understand how some people get attached to animals like this. I would understand your attitude of it was a child that was run over and killed, in a way that it's completely not at fault of the driver. e.g. child playing tag sprints straight onto the road to avoid getting tagged and thus killed. It would be insensitive to then chase up the parent/family immediately after for the damage to the car.

BUT. It's a !!!!!!! animal. There has to be someone psychologically wrong with "animal lovers" who treat animals like humans. Pets are replacable, you shouldn't need time off work be bereave over your dog. Sure I would be bummed out if my cat died. I'd have memories of my cat and stop and think about my cat often, but it wouldn't stop me living my life. It would not stop me from carrying out my responsibilities.

We can't have kids, so please feel free to come to see us and our 4 dogs (who all sleep on the bed with us) in our house for this discussion..