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

verityboo

Tell your neighbor that you have discussed the situation with your insurer and they do not feel you were negligent. Let your neighbor claim on their car insurance. If they think you are liable the neighbors car insurer can try and claim off your house insurance. That is why you pay for it

Stoke

verityboo wrote: »

Tell your neighbor that you have discussed the situation with your insurer and they do not feel you were negligent. Let your neighbor claim on their car insurance. If they think you are liable the neighbors car insurer can try and claim off your house insurance. That is why you pay for it

It's also what he pays for!!

Aretnap

girlneedshelp wrote: »

Thank you for pointing that out! I was wrong about the policy, and just got off the phone with the insurance company (Together Mutual). They say the trampoline damage is not specifically excluded, but that they would more than likely consider it an act of God. They told me that it would similiar to a tile coming off the roof. I know it's not that simple, as a trampoline isn't the same thing, and a court could find negligence with the weather, etc. The insurance company suggested telling the neighbor to claim off their car insurance. I know that won't fly with the neighbor, and I personally understand his point, as it would increase his premiums. He'd never do that in a million years for that reason alone.

So I'm guessing I'm in the same boat. I'll get alternative quotes, and tell my neighbor that I'm prepared to pay the least expensive one. If he is not happy with that, I'll let him bring it to small claims court, and if he is successful, I'll make a formal claim on my home insurance policy for the amount, with the supporting judgement from the court that it was "not an act of God." If they accept that, fine... if not, then I'll have to eat the cost somehow.

A hard lesson learned...

That's good news. Your insurer will pay whatever you're legally required to pay (subject to a couple of caveats, such as letting them conduct the defence if they choose to, and probably not making any (further) attempts to settle or of admissions of liability). So be guided by your insurer as to what to do next. If your neighbour won't claim on his car insurance tell him that you can't afford to pay, and that you've been advised that you're not liable, and that he'll have to take the matter up with your home insurers or make a court claim. If you do get court papers, inform your insurer immediately, as they may want to appoint a solicitor to defend the claim on your behalf rather than letting you go to court yourself. If the court does find against you, your insurer will pick up the bill.

That's the legalistic way of dealing with it anyway, and the way that ensures that you won't have to pay out of your own pocket (beyond whatever excess you have on your home insurance). Of course your neighbour might not be too happy with effectively being told to get stuffed, so to avoid further bad feelings you might want to come to an agreement with him yourself. But if you do that you'll be on your own - your insurer will cover damage you're legally liable for, but not damage you feel sort-of-obliged to pay for out of a sense of social awkwardness. Ultimately only you can decide whether £2500 is a price worth paying to avoid a fall-out with your neighbour.

Warwick_Hunt

Stoke wrote: »

Indeed bertie, but the guy in that thread has a nearly brand new Octavia on PCP. You can see the MSE Issue with that, i.e. he deserved it.

Advice on this forum, seems very sketchy these days and is usually tailored to what car you drive. Of course, the vehicles haven't been mentioned in this thread. Had the OP mentioned it was a Beamer 3 series then half of MSE would have been outside the guys house protesting. Had she mentioned it was a Dacia, then those same people would be outside her house protesting.

Just one of those things.

The reality is, a trampoline that has sat for 10 years and not moved cannot realistically be expected to move in a bit of wind. There's all kinds of things in my garden, plant pots etc. Am I supposed to go and move them if it gets a bit windy outside?

The OP didn't expect there to be an issue, therefore I can't see how she's been negligent. OP, you've been a lot more pleasant than some people. I've had my car bashed in car parks before and been told to go and..... 'do something' yourself, if you get what I mean.... despite the fact bashing someones car isn't a particularly nice thing to do.

Get 3 quotes, offer to pay the cheapest. If he refuses. Tell him go through insurance. Don't pay bloody 2 and a half grand because Norris next door demands it.

Have you borrowed at chip from strider?

stator

Simplest answer is to tell your neighbour to claim off his insurance

He will get the repair he wants and the insurance company will try to keep the costs down.

It's unlikely they will come after you, but if they do you can offer to settle before it gets to court.

verityboo

stator wrote: »

It's unlikely they will come after you, but if they do you can offer to settle before it gets to court.

Why would the OP pay when they have their own insurance company who would either pay or defend the case?

Stoke

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

Have you borrowed at chip from strider?

Nope, but I'm not exactly wrong am I ? How many threads lately have taken a turn when the OP has mentioned they happen to drive a nicer than average car? It's pathetic. If there's any chip on the shoulder it is those who have a problem with that.

I drive a 200 quid piece of !!!!. I don't care about it either, but I really think it's pathetic how people are made to feel bad because they made a decision to buy something they'd enjoy.

cajef

Stoke wrote: »

I think you're jumping to conclusions, it might be a Beamer, or better yet a Merc, let's just wait and see eh?

I would like to know where you can buy a new Beamer or Merc for 7 grand?

girlneedshelp wrote: »

The car is only a year old, but was only £7000 new,

CardinalWolsey

Putting aside any legal opinion of liability, and focusing on what you believe your moral duty to be, I would suggest that your neighbour should be put back in the position they were in prior to the trampoline striking their car. That does not mean a brand new bonnet and roof (as you could argue that would put them in a better position than they were previously), and so a straight repair seems sensible. Best value would require three separate quotes to repair, and not - as has been mentioned above - with the neighbour getting quotes to perform work as they are instructing.

If that still comes out as excessive, I would be citing my house insurers response, and suggest to my neighbour "My insurer says that I'm not liable, and that you should be claiming off your car insurance. I still feel guilty though, so without admitting any liability, why don't you claim off your car insurance and let me pay your excess". That would be a fair and amicable solution in my mind.

Note, he has to declare the incident now to his current car insurer, and on renewal to any other insurer for the next five years

MataNui

CardinalWolsey wrote: »

If that still comes out as excessive, I would be citing my house insurers response, and suggest to my neighbour "My insurer says that I'm not liable, and that you should be claiming off your car insurance.

What the OPs insurer says to the OP about liability is pretty much 100% BS. They would NEVER advise a client to admit liability even if it was clear cut beyond any doubt. Only a court could properly determine liability though i would say failing to secure a huge sail when there were ample severe weather warnings would be at least naive, stupid etc let alone negligent (which would suggest liability).

As a test i wonder what the OPs insurer would do if the OP was claiming for a new patio window / furniture etc because their own unsecured trampoline blew into it? Pretty sure they would then be saying the OP was negligent and should of secured it so they wouldnt pay out.