Told neighbor I pay for trampoline damage if I'm responsible, but am I responsible?

Stoke

gardner1 wrote: »

At the end of the day the guy is entitled to have his car repaired to the same condition before accident.....and if that means being repaired at a main dealer that's tough on OP.......who should have taken more care with trampoline

Maybe the owner shouldn't have parked his car in high winds?

girlneedshelp

Stoke wrote: »

Maybe the owner shouldn't have parked his car in high winds?

This is just FYI. The neighbor told me that he had seen the trampoline rise several feet up into the air in the hours before the trampoline flew over. He said he didn't think it would actually climb the fence though, so he didn't inform me or move his car. Obviously he only told me this after it ended up going over the 6ft fence... oh well.

sheramber

if the car has a bodywork warranty any repairs must be done to the manufacturers requirements with approved parts and materials.

When our car was damaged the insurance company said if we took it to their recommended body shop they would automatically pay for the repair.

If we wanted to use another body shop they would need to send out an assessor to check the estimated
cost.

We chose to use a manufacturer approved body shop so as to preserve our body work warranty.

gardner1

usefulmale wrote: »

Does your neighbour have a garage for his car? If so, I would argue that they were partially negligent in leaving the car outside with well-publicised high winds approaching and reduce any offer accordingly.

Especially if he tells his insurance company it is garaged every night.

Stoke wrote: »

Oooh snap. I like your thinking.

Stoke wrote: »

Maybe the owner shouldn't have parked his car in high winds?

What a stupid comment........at the end of the day the owner is responsible for the trampoline being secured to ground or packed away
Bet you wouldn't be so forgiving if it were your car........OP needs to pay or claim on house insurance

girlneedshelp

gardner1 wrote: »

What a stupid comment........at the end of the day the owner is responsible for the trampoline being secured to ground or packed away
Bet you wouldn't be so forgiving if it were your car........OP needs to pay or claim on house insurance

My home insurance is saying it's an act of God and the the owner should claim on their car insurance, so I'm left to deal with the situation myself. I personally think the £2400 quote for two small dents on a £5k car is unreasonable, but I'm a novice in this area. So going on some of the advice I'm receiving, the best thing is to have him bring me to small claims, then inform my home insurance about the litigation and take their advice from there. If the court rules that it is not an act of God and believe that £2400 is completely reasonable, then I would imagine my home insurance would have to pay up, as they wouldn't be able to claim it's an act of God anymore. If they won't pay up for whatever reason, I'll find the money somwhere. Either way, I doubt I'll be out more than £2400. I'll be providing the court with alternative estimates based on a repair, not a replacement of the bonnet and top panel/roof. I'll let the court decide my liability and what's fair and reasonable, as this is not my field of expertise, and I suppose that's what they are there for, when there is uncertainty.

Equaliser123

girlneedshelp wrote: »

My home insurance is saying it's an act of God and the the owner should claim on their car insurance, so I'm left to deal with the situation myself. I personally think the £2400 quote for two small dents on a £5k car is unreasonable, but I'm a novice in this area. So going on some of the advice I'm receiving, the best thing is to have him bring me to small claims, then inform my home insurance about the litigation and take their advice from there. If the court rules that it is not an act of God and believe that £2400 is completely reasonable, then I would imagine my home insurance would have to pay up, as they wouldn't be able to claim it's an act of God anymore. If they won't pay up for whatever reason, I'll find the money somwhere. Either way, I doubt I'll be out more than £2400. I'll be providing the court with alternative estimates based on a repair, not a replacement of the bonnet and top panel/roof. I'll let the court decide what's fair and reasonable, as this is not my field of expertise, and I suppose that's what they are there for, when there is uncertainty.

Neighbour is under a duty to mitigate his losses. He should be required to provide evidence that it is reasonable to go ahead with the £2400 repair. The usual way to do this is to show other quotes. No necessity to go with the cheapest (they may not be regarded as comparably good) but equally it should be in the same ball park.

Negligence would, I think be very difficult to prove. Rule in Ryland -v- Fletcher wouldn't apply as it is not something 'brought onto and kept' on your land. Occupiers Liability Act wouldn't create liability as he didn't come onto your land.

The act of God argument may well work in your favour. If you could not reasonably forsee that the trampoline would act like that, then you can defend yourself by claiming act of God yourself. Have a look here:

https://www.blandy.co.uk/blog/storm-damage-and-neighbour-disputes

I don't think you are liable at all.

newbutold

girlneedshelp wrote: »

Thanks for the advice. I think the issue is going to be whether these three quotes are to completely replace the respective parts, or to repair them. Three quotes to replace the parts in question, along with the relevant labour may all be very similiar in the £2000+ range, whereas three quotes to repair and repaint the dents may all be in the £600+ range. I do feel a sense of responsibility, so I'm not going to just ignore a demand from payment, but I'm not sure the £2400 quote is reasonable.

If he went through his insurance he would not have the choice or repair or replace. It waould be repaired if repairable and only replaced if it wasn't repairable/it was cheaper to replace then repair.

Therefore if it is repairable, this is all I would be paying for. That's if you are actually legally responsible for the damage. However if you aren't legally responsible, given he is a neighbour, coming to some mutually agreed settlement might be best in the long run.

My personal opinion, I don't think you are responsible and he should claim of his car insurance.

chrisw

girlneedshelp wrote: »

This is just FYI, and not a justification or an attempt to escape responsibility. The neighbor told me that he had seen the trampoline rise several feet up into the air in the hours before the trampoline flew over. He said he didn't think it would actually climb the fence though, so he didn't inform me or move his car. Obviously he only told me this after it ended up going over the 6ft fence... oh well.

If he had told you this before it happened and you had ignored it then you could have been deemed negligent and forced to pay by a court.

As it is, I'm with the insurance company in that its an Act of God and you are not liable.

Tom99

girlneedshelp wrote: »

Thanks for the advice. I think the issue is going to be whether these three quotes are to completely replace the respective parts, or to repair them. Three quotes to replace the parts in question, along with the relevant labour may all be very similiar in the £2000+ range, whereas three quotes to repair and repaint the dents may all be in the £600+ range. I do feel a sense of responsibility, so I'm not going to just ignore a demand from payment, but I'm not sure the £2400 quote is reasonable.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Unless it is a remarkable coincidence, your neighbour thinks they can fix the 'pretty superficial damage' for £380, not the £2,500 they gave you a bill for.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]See this thread posted on the same day which just might be from your neighbours:-

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5729865[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]to quote from that other thread:-[/FONT]
“[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I can’t find the appropriate forum section for this topic so if a moderator can bump this if necessary that would be greatly appreciated! My partner has a car on PCP, she has gap insurance as well as fully comp. The other night the wind lifted our next door neighbors kids large outdoor trampoline up and onto her car. The damage was pretty superficial, a dent on the bonnet and wing. We’ve got a quote from a local car body shop for £380. Question is, are they responsible for paying for the repairs? We don’t want to use the car insurance as the premium will go up. Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks Steve”

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]There are some discrepancies however, you say it was the bonnet and roof but the other poster had damage to the bonnet and wing so maybe it is not your neighbour.[/FONT]

photome

girlneedshelp is your neighbours name steven