Was involved in a car accident earlier today, whos liable?

Jamie_Carter

Altarf wrote: »

Why?

What did they do, other than drive the car and park it.

Was their hand on the door handle?

Because it was the door of their vehicle that was opened into the side of the other vehicle. It doesn't matter if they didn't actually open the door, they allowed it to be opened into the path of the other vehicle.

Jamie_Carter

Altarf wrote: »

So how is the driver negligent?

They drove to a marked parking space.
Stopped.
Waited for the passenger to get out.

What could the car driver have done to stop the passenger opening the door. Nothing, therefore the driver is not negligent.



No, the passenger is negligent, and the passenger has to pay for the damage to the other car, and the OP's car.

You don't understand how it works do you??

Altarf

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

You don't understand how it works do you??

Clearly better than some on here.

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Because it was the door of their vehicle that was opened into the side of the other vehicle. It doesn't matter if they didn't actually open the door, they allowed it to be opened into the path of the other vehicle.

And how did they "allow" it. By parking. Be sensible.

The passenger opened the door without looking, they were the person that was negligent. There was nothing the driver could do apart from key driving round and round in circles and never stopping.

DUTR

Altarf wrote: »

If the OP would like it to, it will.

What people seem to get confused by is what the legal situation is, and what the moral situation is.

Will the OP tell the passenger, get lost, your problem, oh and by the way I am suing you for the damage to my car. No they won't. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't.



But maybe in this case they will be...

Readers are not getting confused, you seem to be forgetting the claim by the passing innocent vehicle, He simply reports the incident to his insurer's and they will deal, the claims assesors will simply look at the case and the OP's insurer will decide it is not worth defending and settle, what happens in the OP's camp is a seperate drama.

Altarf

DUTR wrote: »

Readers are not getting confused, you seem to be forgetting the claim by the passing innocent vehicle, He simply reports the incident to his insurer's and they will deal, the claims assesors will simply look at the case and the OP's insurer will decide it is not worth defending and settle, what happens in the OP's camp is a seperate drama.

They will not deal if the OP says "I did not cause the accident. The car was stopped, and the accident was caused by the passenger. I do not approve for you to extend my cover to them".

Lifes_Grand_Plan

Altarf wrote: »

It can and does, because the person that caused the accident was not the OP, the insured.

Wow! Are you related to the OP? Arguing black is actually white?

Lets say the car door was ajar and a freak gust of wind then blew it into the passing car.... by your line of thinking the OP isn't negligent so the damaged party would have to sue the wind for repairs... get real!

Jamie_Carter

Altarf wrote: »

But the OP has no liability for the damage to the 3rd party car. That damage was caused by the actions of their passenger.

It was caused by the door of the OP's car

DUTR

Altarf wrote: »

They will not deal if the OP says "I did not cause the accident. The car was stopped, and the accident was caused by the passenger. I do not approve for you to extend my cover to them".

That's not how it will work though, what if the OP had parked on a hill and their car had rolled into another or a person, could they say I was not in the car so I do not approve for you to extend their cover? They (the OP) does not have the choice of if their insurers approve or not, we would all disapprove of claims made against us and nothing would get settled.

Lifes_Grand_Plan

Altarf wrote: »

And how did they "allow" it. By parking. Be sensible.

Definition of allow: "let (someone) have or do something."

The OP let the passenger open his car door into the oncoming vehicle.

Case closed. Everyone down to the pub....

Jamie_Carter

Altarf wrote: »

Clearly better than some on here.



And how did they "allow" it. By parking. Be sensible.

The passenger opened the door without looking, they were the person that was negligent. There was nothing the driver could do apart from key driving round and round in circles and never stopping.

The passenger has no legal requirement to be insured to be a passenger in a vehicle. It's the vehicle that has to have a minimum of third party insurance for circumstances exactly like this, and many others.