Dog ran into me and I broke my ankle - now what?

catkins

custardy wrote: »

So you know the dog is not a robot. So you let it run about and say oh well these things happen?

I am saying that no dog is a robot. A dog can behaving perfectly 99% of the time but you can never be totallycertain of their behaviour which is why I don't think people should walk them along pavements on busy roads without leads. Yes, they may walk quietly by your side every day for month but there could be something day that spooks them.


In a park dogs should be allowed to run around and have fun just as children should. Oh and by the way children are not robots either. In fact considering children by a certain age understand what is being said to them they are far less well behaved than most dogs

lostinrates wrote: »

We have big dogs who have run in to us occasionally and once another person. Had that been serious I would have expected a claim to be made for loss of earnings. As it was it was not serious and the robust adult was knocked over but not injured by a young dog and after the shock that always comes with a fall found it quite humorous. Perhaps they might have found it less so had we tried to evade showing concern and responsibility?

I've also been knocked over by other people's dogs. C'est la vie. If I were injured I would appreciate help, even just getting home and stuff. Just beggaring off showing no concern in a situation of boisterousness rather than antagonism between dogs is IMO a poor show.

My previous dog twice knocked someone over when he was playing with their dog. Of course I was apologetic and asked if they were ok. Luckily they were fine and thought it funny.

ash28

About 2 years when he was out in the car OH hit a dog that ran out of a field into the road....the owner kept livestock in the field which was across the road from their house....the dogs, two of them, had followed her and she hadn't noticed that they didn't follow her home.

OH could perhaps have avoided the dog but would have ended up off the road in a waterway - very common in our part of Lincolnshire and often deep and not recommended if you are in a car (or out of one, for that matter). The road is country road and the speed limit is 60mph.

The dog was hurt and the car was damaged.....who was responsible for the damage to the car - the dog owner. OH reported the accident to the car insurance company - they recovered the costs from the dog owners insurance. The dog should not have been on the highway off lead.

And, yes it was an accident but it was the dog owners fault. Should OH have said "Don't worry about it - it was an accident" and either paid the £1300 worth of damage to the car and a weeks car hire himself, or seen increased insurance premiums for his motor insurance for something that was entirely avoidable had the dog owner been a bit more responsible. Reading the posts on here that is exactly what he should have done. Are dog owners a special case? Where no matter what damage their dogs do, they aren't responsible for it.

We have a dog, she is insured and if we couldn't afford the insurance for her I would take out public liability insurance or see if she was covered for public liability on our house insurance.

We live in a rural area and walk our dog in the fields behind the house, we rarely meet anyone but when we come up to a style or a hedge break into another field she goes on the lead. I have seen a number of accidents involving dogs. In our last area a woman I know was knocked over by her own dog and shattered both wrists. I've seen a child knocked off their bike in the park. A child terrified of a jumping dog - "he's only playing....", how often have I heard that old chestnut. If dog owners have no control over their dogs then the dogs should be on a lead - how often have I heard owners screeching after their dogs who take not a blind bit of notice of them. Too often.

Yes, accidents do happen in all walks of life and as dog owners it's our responsibility to keep those accidents involving our dogs to a minimum. And if our dogs do cause accidents or damage either to people or their property we have to accept the consequences.

Like Lostinrates, if our dog injured someone badly enough to lead to loss of earnings then I would fully expect a claim to be made for that loss. A claim for loss of dignity would be another matter altogether.

lostinrates

Yeah, I've been knocked over by kids too, and adults come to think of it.

I'd hope they would help too.

I also tumble a fair bit by my self, its amazing how infrequently people do help. . Genuine accidents, no one at any risk of blame, but no one willing to see if some one needs help.

allconnected

Why on earth do people still think that insurance doesn't apply if the incident is "an accident"! That's exactly what insurance is for, things that aren't done deliberately but cause harm or loss.

There's a different name for it when individuals cause harm, damage or loss deliberately - it's called a crime!

Of course, to claim from the dog owner's insurance it will probably be necessary to show that the injury arose from negligence on their part, and in a park frequented by both runners and off-lead dogs that may prove difficult here. But the fact that it was an accident means that insurance is relevant- it's if it wasn't an accident that you'd be involving the police, not the insurance companies!

Allconnected

jc808

Andyclockwise wrote: »

In fact according to the App on my phone we were going 4.1mph, which is 1mph faster than walking speed. My partner tried to avoid the dog, but TBH she could have been standing still,.

So you admit you were moving?
It sounds to me like with both parties being on the move, its an accident. When you saw the dog, why not slow down or stop? Its well known among the general public (and you are a dog owner yourself) that running at a dog can cause it to behave unpredictably.

As everyone here is so keen on car insurance analogies to defend OP, what would the outcome be if two cars hit each other while moving on a bit of road with no road markings or clear right of way/ priority ?
I think we all know the answer....

wiogs

"In a park dogs should be allowed to run around and have fun just as children should."

Our local park has a by-law that all dogs must be kept on a lead so they don't run about.

Thankfully.

tinkerbell28

Several points as a dog owner. We own a lab and I never let it off it's lead in public areas or where other people are around. For the reason labs as a breed are like big children, they are very playful and jumpy. They may not mean to hurt you, but they can bloody well knock you for 6. As they are HEAVY.

One this is what pet insurance is for, it has public liability.

Two, it's quite possible if the op did take this further, then the dog owner has actually committed a criminal offence.

https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/overview

Just because "he didn't mean it". The dog was so boisterous and out of control he's seriously hurt someone at the end of the day. He bounded up to them (as labs often do) and knocked her over with such force that she's shattered her ankle. Accident or not, that's a dog out of control/a dangerous one. As it has injured someone. So the owner should be more careful about leashing, or where he off leads and puts the lead back on.

If it leaves op in financial hardship, so they should claim!

I'm gobsmacked that people genuinely don't see, this is partly what pet insurance is for, that it was an irresponsible owner and technically the owner has committed a criminal offence. I usually hate compo claim threads, but I feel in this case, it's justified with the level of injury.

If they know the lab is prone to bounding up to people it should NOT be off the lead.

lostinrates

wiogs wrote: »

"In a park dogs should be allowed to run around and have fun just as children should."

Our local park has a by-law that all dogs must be kept on a lead so they don't run about.

Thankfully.

There are some places dogs should be on leads ...round play areas, on pavements etc etc.

If dogs are damned to a life on leads I would expect incidents of frustration like attacks, poor behaviour etc to INCREASE not decrease. IMO if off lead excercise and socialise cannot be provided in MOST but not all cases it is a poor situation for a dog to be in ( for physical health and for welfare)

moggymutt

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

If you've only just moved to this small village then bear in mind that pursuing this course may result in ostracisation.

Every one of your neighbours is going to hear about this and it won't be forgotten.

It may be that other neighbours are fed up of this dog knocking them over as well.

If the OP doesn't get compensation they may well lose their house and have to leave the village.

lazer

A dog is meant to be kept under by control by the owner even when off lead.
This dog was off lead and obviously not under control, therefore the owner was negligent.

So of course the OP can claim and should claim. Dog owners need to be responsible for their dogs when offlead!

I remember walking home from work in my good suit and a dog appeared from no-where and jumped up at me dirtying my good suit, the owner just laughed, and politely informed her the suit was dry clean only and asked her to cover the bill, to which i got a mouthful of bad language and off she went.