Neighbour's Wheelie Bin Damaged my Car

foxtrotoscar_2

undaunted wrote: »

Have you considered the possibility that we may be right and you wrong?

Yes. You're not! You and the OP are clearly wrong.

undaunted

Quentin wrote: »

Yes.


Considered and rejected it.


(Why is the rest of the world out of step with you?)


If the OP gets pumped up by your support it'll end in tears - as they will be wasting all their money on court fees/hearing fees/paying the defendants expenses for attending court

Well, you're hardly "the rest of the world" are you?

Fees for a small claim application are nominal - see https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees and other than for fixed costs, such as court fee, loss of earnings etc solicitors costs & the like will not normally be awarded against you in a small claims case.

undaunted

Quentin wrote: »

You look to have missed this where the OP revealed their self as a bully

I didn't miss it at all. I simply don't consider that to be bullying. The poster feels aggrieved and to have suffered a loss, therefore is now warning the other party that they are considering exercising their legal right to issue a Court Claim for that loss.

Bullying would be going round there and threatening them - as was foolishly and sarcastically suggested by another poster above.

undaunted

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Wow, are you for real? I agree with the posters here who are saying that they hope you get a harassment order from the Courts. What an unpleasant individual you sound, as well as a bully. This poor couple: I feel very sorry for them.

When me and my husband were in our late 20s (back in the 1990s,) we moved into a property that had a man of about 55 living alone (his wife had left him 5 years before not surprisingly!) and as soon as we moved in, he came around and said that our front porch impeded on HIS land by 2 inches and that we have to take it down.

We had just moved house because a noisy family moved next to us in the house we had been living happily in for 5 or 6 years. They started screaming, and playing loud music, and had driven us and our baby out, (after telling us they can do what they like in their own house!) Then the first day in the new house, this man came banging on the door, telling us we need to smash our porch down, as it was encroaching onto his land or something. He threatened us with legal action if we didn't remove our porch! When he left our front doorstep, I just burst into tears!

We went back to the solicitor, and told her what he said, and she said the previous owners had put the porch up 5 years ago, and planning permission had been sought, and no neighbour complained. Our solicitor spoke to the previous owner of our house, and they signed a statement to say that the man had not mentioned a THING to them in the five years since they erected the porch.

Our solicitor then wrote a polite but sternly worded letter saying if he doesn't refrain from harassing us, further action will be taken. And when we had the surveyor back, it turned out the porch was NOT on any of his land. He was trying it on; Heaven knows why.

The OP sounds like the same kind of unpleasant bully who thinks because someone is young, they can be pushed around. Wrong. We didn't let it happen, and I sincerely hope this couple don't get bullied by the OP either. They should not give him a BEAN, and I hope the repair costs 5 grand!

Your judgement appears to be clouded by personal experiences though this wasn't remotely the same thing. Your neighbour had suffered no losses or damages at all. Mercowner has done so - through no fault of his / her own - and simply wants to recover them, hardly unreasonable surely.



It's debatable who is trying to bully who here. Some of you have advocated illegal acts and / or their deserving to become the target of such acts in response to the poster simply wishing - not unreasonably - to seek to recover his / her losses in a reasonable and lawful manner.

Quentin

undaunted wrote: »

Well, you're hardly "the rest of the world" are you?

Fees for a small claim application are nominal - see https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees .....

Depends on your interpretation of 'nominal'

The 'nominal' fees you link to are simply the fee for issuing the claim (minimum £60 for a £600 claim)


The full cost of the court fees for the hearing will be £140 (for a £600 claim). When the OP loses then the OP will also have to pay the other sides loss of earnings + expenses for attending the court (as well as their own loss of earnings and expenses)

MercOwner

undaunted wrote: »

I didn't miss it at all. I simply don't consider that to be bullying. The poster feels aggrieved and to have suffered a loss, therefore is now warning the other party that they are considering exercising their legal right to issue a Court Claim for that loss.

Bullying would be going round there and threatening them - as was foolishly and sarcastically suggested by another poster above.

Exactly, thank you. At least someone on here has sense. This was their fault, they should have tied their bin down or secured it in some other way. I don't see how wanting to reimbursed for that makes me a bully. I feel like I've been vilified on here, but I'm really not that bad. I just think like undaunted says that they should have been reasonable and neighbourly and offered to pay at least some of it.

Quentin

undaunted wrote: »

Well, you're hardly "the rest of the world" are you? .......

You quote out of context.


It's just you who is out of step with the rest of the world who have contributed to help the OP in this thread save some money! (And a relationship with their innocent neighbours)

SeduLOUs

undaunted wrote: »

:money:If the Court considers that they were negligent then they may order them to pay for the damages, accident or not. Insurers have to pay out for accidents all the time. Why do you believe that the Court would say that Mercowner or their insurers should pay for something that wasn't his / her fault either?

If it's nobody's fault (i.e. the very likely outcome that the neighbour is not found to have been negligent), the Court will order that nobody pays anybody, and the car owner will just have to deal with the consequences of the 'accident'.

Insurers pay out for accidents all the time, AFTER they have established fault. They don't tend to pay out unless they have to.

Quentin

MercOwner wrote: »

..... they should have been reasonable and neighbourly and offered to pay at least some of it.

But you are being unreasonable expecting them to pay you anything as they are not liable!


As previously posted, you came for advice yet only seem happy when undaunted wrongly tells you what you want to hear, and wrongly believe because of this undaunted is the only one who has "sense" here!

foxtrotoscar_2

MercOwner wrote: »

Exactly, thank you. At least someone on here has sense. This was their fault, they should have tied their bin down or secured it in some other way. I don't see how wanting to reimbursed for that makes me a bully. I feel like I've been vilified on here, but I'm really not that bad. I just think like undaunted says that they should have been reasonable and neighbourly and offered to pay at least some of it.

Why didn't you move your car out of harms way if it was in danger of being hit by the bin? Are you not liable?