Cycling and a stone hit a car - am I liable??

regthellama

I was cycling through a car park earlier today and I went over a stone. This flew out and hit someone's driver window. Luckily no-one was in the car as the window completely smashed. I left my name and number for the owner. Now I'm wondering who is liable though? I wasn't cycling quickly (10mph max) or in any way negligently and I was at least 4 metres from the car.

Also, having just spoken to the owner she was looking at getting quotes for repair prices (and trying to charge me) before even talking to the insurance company. Would the insurance company have right to charge excess on something like this where nobody is to blame?
Thanks for your help.

[Deleted User]

Sounds like the car park owner is liable. They have a responsibility to keep it clear of dangerous stones and the like. Similar to how road owners (usually the council) are responsible for damage from pot holes.

regthellama

Hmmm, sounds like it might be difficult to claim anything back from the car park owner, but thanks for the advice.

geri1965_2

Of course you are not liable - you have not been negligent in any way, it's just one of those things.

DO NOT make any offer of payment. The motorist will have to go to her own insurers, that is presumably why she takes out insurance!

somethingcorporate

Agreed with the rest here, this is not for you to pay up on.

ska_lover

As a question of morality, yes I would say you are liable - the windscreen would not have gone through if you hadn't been in the vicinity, so IMO it is your responsibility and it is morally wrong to expect the motorist to suffer the insurance excess fee.

Johno100

regthellama wrote: »

Hmmm, sounds like it might be difficult to claim anything back from the car park owner, but thanks for the advice.

I hope you have reported the incident to your own insurers.

Crazy_Jamie

ska_lover wrote: »

As a question of morality, yes I would say you are liable - the windscreen would not have gone through if you hadn't been in the vicinity, so IMO it is your responsibility and it is morally wrong to expect the motorist to suffer the insurance excess fee.

I disagree. This was a genuine accident that in the circumstances could not have been avoided. It is unfortunate if the owner of the vehicle has to pay out an insurance excess, but frankly unfortunate incidents such as this are part of the reason why you have insurance in the first place.

DELETED USER wrote:

Sounds like the car park owner is liable. They have a responsibility to keep it clear of dangerous stones and the like. Similar to how road owners (usually the council) are responsible for damage from pot holes.

Of course it depends on the nature of the stone and the circumstances as a whole, but you're more than likely wrong about this. The car park owner would only have a duty under section 2 of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, that being a duty to take all steps that are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that lawful visitors are reasonably safe. I find it hard to imagine a scenario where a car park owner would be liable for stones on the ground of the car park, unless it had been reported as a specific issue previously or the stone was part of debris that was causing a clear hazard. The duty on occupiers is to take reasonable steps, it is not to be perfect, and chances are in this scenario that car park owner hasn't done anything unreasonable in failing to sweep up a solitary stone that caused damage to someone's car.

regthellama

Well I don't mind paying some of the cost - the argumentthat if iI hadn't been there it wouldn't have happened etc, although at the same time that could also be levelled at the person who parked their car there! I am definitely not willing to pay the full cost though, whatever that turns out to be...

ska_lover

Another example of why cyclists should be forced to take out their own insurance for damages against other vehicles and people. It seems madness to me that they are allowed to mingle with cars and HGVs on the roads without it.

IMO there is no such thing as a 'no fault' accident when it comes to vehicles and property. If you are in the vicinity of someones property and damage it accidentally or intentionally, the fact remains it still happened - and wouldn't have done if you weren't there.

If you knocked in to someone in a pub and spilled their pint down their shirt, you wouldn't expect to shrug your shoulders and say 'it's just one of those things' - the decent thing would be to apologise and replace their drink

To be fair to you OP, you did great just leaving your contact details, as unscrupulous people would have just rode off

geri1965_2

ska_lover wrote: »

Another example of why cyclists should be forced to take out their own insurance. Liability insurance for damage against cars/people.

IMO there is no such thing as a 'no fault' accident when it comes to vehicles and property. If you are in the vicinity of someones property and damage it accidentally or intentionally, the fact remains it still happened

If you knocked in to someone in a pub and spilled their pint down their shirt, you wouldn't expect to shrug your shoulders and say 'it's just one of those things' - the decent thing would be to apologise and replace their drink

I'm a cyclist and have insurance with my home insurers. They would absolutely not pay out for an incident like this, because there is no negligence involved.

So it would appear that you are arguing from a point of ignorance unfortunately.