Damage to car alloy & tyre

Portly_Pig

senoraylan wrote: »

The road narrows! Already said.

It was the angle he hit the kerb, not the speed that did the damage! Already said.

He wasn't going fast! Already said.

He's an LGV driver, very careful, very safe with regular 100% scores on the on board fleet monitor.

And some of you on here are a nasty bunch. Wouldn't like to meet you on a dark night :eek:

A simple yes or no & a brief explanation would have been enough, not a load of vitriol about something you have no intentions of understanding. Why do forums bring out the worst in some people?

He appears to have been careless on this occasion. I hope he has informed his own insurance company.

OddballJamie

Portly_Pig wrote: »

He appears to have been careless on this occasion. I hope he has informed his own insurance company.

Also the council incase they want to put in a claim against him for damaging a kerb.

fivetide

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Section 22 of the Road Traffic Act would suggest he did.

However this does not take the blame away from the moving vehicle. I hope the insurance company stand their ground.

For those who don't like people quoting stuff without reference:


22 Leaving vehicles in dangerous positions.E+W+S

If a person in charge of a vehicle causes or permits the vehicle or a trailer drawn by it to remain at rest on a road in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to [F1involve a danger of injury] to other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

However, in this case, as you said, the issue is with the moving vehicle so it is essentially irrelevant.

molerat

Would he have hit the kerb if the other vehicle was moving ?

Crabman

Ultimately it's up to your husband what he does. If a claim is issued against the other party in the small claims court a Judge will look at the facts on both sides and make a decision.

Your husband should have informed his insurer by now if he is actively claiming against the other party. He doesn't have to claim off his insurance but he will need to inform them under the terms and conditions of the policy.

Joe_Horner

Crabman wrote: »

Your husband should have informed his insurer by now if he is actively claiming against the other party. He doesn't have to claim off his insurance but he will need to inform them under the terms and conditions of the policy.

Which will inevitably increase his own insurance at renewal for the next several years even if by some miracle his claim succeeds - which it won't.

bigjl

This thread made me laugh.

My OH is unable to drive without hitting the kerb!

Do I have a claim.

Yes, claim off the pavement.

The simple fact is the road was wide enough to fit a car.

Your OH appear to have misjudged it.

If there wasn't enough room the. He would have had to simply mount the pavement in such a way as not to damage the wheel and tyre.

A manoeuvre carried out by thousands of drivers every day without incident.

Though some drivers do misjudge widths and distances on occasion.

I suspect we have all done it.

We accept responsibility for out misjudgement and get the old wallet out.

Avoriaz

senoraylan wrote: »

..And some of you on here are a nasty bunch. Wouldn't like to meet you on a dark night :eek:?

I wouldn't like to meet your husband driving around corners on a dark night.

Tomby1

I think everyone needs to step back and take a deep breath!

It's quite simple really;

OP, you will need to have proof that the parking position of this truck forced your husband to take evasive maneuvers, causing your husband to damage his vehicle.

I hope he ensured pictures were taken at the time of the truck parked and the car impact point - and ideally if an independent witness was present, it would have been extremely useful to get a statement from them that this truck was parked dangerously.

Can you upload a picture of the road, where the truck was positioned and where your husband came round the corner? This would help enormously.

Also, what approximate speed was your husband doing as he turned the corner? And how far, in approximate metres, was the truck parked from the initial point of visibility?

Based on the current information you have given, you'd have to get a very sympathetic underwriter to agree to your claim - but seeing those pictures would help.

KTF

This thread is great. The OP will fight this one to the death...