Child run into side of my car causing damage + small claims court

Marvel1

I would also recommend telling your insurance, there is a chance the mother will claim for injuries all because she failed to teach the basics of road safety, and innocent people are the ones that get screwed over.

£190 that's quite cheap.

societys_child

sevenhills wrote: »

Not sure a parent is legally bound to pay, there may be some responsibility; but I would just forget it ever happened.

Stupid advice.

sevenhills wrote: »

Try again on another thread, but instead of saying the car is a BMW, put Nissan

Oh, very funny, mine was actually a Nissan and although the 8yr old damaged his leg when he ran into it, the Nissan didn't fall apart, there was no damage to the vehicle at all . . .

AquaGirl

glentoran99 wrote: »

Who's to say your version is the true story?

apd100 wrote: »

about 6 adults, who have all messaged me on facebook to see if I was okay, 2 elderly whitnesses who passed their details to me and also stopped to tell the parents what had happened. Anything else?

Got to love the internet & the people out to pull others apart at every opportunity. I'm only surprised there wasn't a follow up of "well we only have your word that there's 6 people, what if there's actually only 1 person who's a blind man but said he heard everything".



I recently spectated an argument on Facebook. It was in my local area group where residents of the area join. Plenty of 1000s of people in the group kind of thing. An incident occurred where a child was careless (i wont go in to detail but it was actually a funny story - nobody was harmed). The amount of people who thought the child was blameless JUST because it was a child was unreal.

Which makes me wonder what the reactions would've been on this thread had it been a saggy pants wearing teenager running out & caused the damage. Would the OP have been turned on as quickly? Maybe, maybe not.

Mercdriver

AquaGirl wrote: »

Got to love the internet & the people out to pull others apart at every opportunity. I'm only surprised there wasn't a follow up of "well we only have your word that there's 6 people, what if there's actually only 1 person who's a blind man but said he heard everything".



I recently spectated an argument on Facebook. It was in my local area group where residents of the area join. Plenty of 1000s of people in the group kind of thing. An incident occurred where a child was careless (i wont go in to detail but it was actually a funny story - nobody was harmed). The amount of people who thought the child was blameless JUST because it was a child was unreal.

Which makes me wonder what the reactions would've been on this thread had it been a saggy pants wearing teenager running out & caused the damage. Would the OP have been turned on as quickly? Maybe, maybe not.

Stop being so emotional. Stick to facts.

The child is 8 years old. FACT

The age of legal responsibility in England and Wales is 10 years old. FACT.

You cannot sue someone who is too young to have responsibility for their actions by legal definitions.

If it had been a 'saggy trousered teenager' (great generalisation there) then legally he could have been held responsible, but whether he would have had the funds to pay is another matter.

The parents? They have no legal responsibility at all.

Not fair? As Esther Rantzen used to say, "That's Life".

glentoran99

AquaGirl wrote: »

Got to love the internet & the people out to pull others apart at every opportunity. I'm only surprised there wasn't a follow up of "well we only have your word that there's 6 people, what if there's actually only 1 person who's a blind man but said he heard everything".



I recently spectated an argument on Facebook. It was in my local area group where residents of the area join. Plenty of 1000s of people in the group kind of thing. An incident occurred where a child was careless (i wont go in to detail but it was actually a funny story - nobody was harmed). The amount of people who thought the child was blameless JUST because it was a child was unreal.

Which makes me wonder what the reactions would've been on this thread had it been a saggy pants wearing teenager running out & caused the damage. Would the OP have been turned on as quickly? Maybe, maybe not.

He hasn't informed his insurance, There could be a claim against him, that could well be what he faces down the line, it wasn't about pulling anyone apart,

Car_54

Mercdriver wrote: »

The age of legal responsibility in England and Wales is 10 years old. FACT.

You cannot sue someone who is too young to have responsibility for their actions by legal definitions.

Merely saying FACT in capital letters does not make something true.

10 years is the age of criminal, not legal, responsibility in E & W.

The OP is not suggesting that the child has committed a crime, but rather asking about a civil claim. AFAIK there is no such age limit in civil law.

glentoran99

A small claim can be issued against a minor, Which must go before a court, cant be issued in default, however if you win how do you enforce payment?

Strider590

AquaGirl wrote: »

The amount of people who thought the child was blameless JUST because it was a child was unreal.

Not only are they blameless, but that blamelessness is often transferred to the parent as well...... Boils my blood when people use their kids as an excuse for doing something stupid/illegal/etc.

buglawton

societys_child wrote: »

The child had minor bruising, your 3 series bmw suffered £190 damage?

Not sure how it'd go in court.

Could one sue BMW for making weak cars?

Warwick_Hunt

Car_54 wrote: »

Merely saying FACT in capital letters does not make something true.

10 years is the age of criminal, not legal, responsibility in E & W.

The OP is not suggesting that the child has committed a crime, but rather asking about a civil claim. AFAIK there is no such age limit in civil law.

But what's the point? An 8 year old is unlikely to have the means to pay.