Ran over a dog

facade

See if the dog owner has insurance, and claim off their policy. Pet insurance will certainly cover it, some home insurances will.



If they don't, claim on your own insurance.


Civil action will likely end in tears even if you get the money.

Nick_C

AdrianC wrote: »

BTW - "well below the speed limit" is not, in itself, a laudable thing. You would fail your driving test for driving more slowly than prevailing conditions allowed.

If this happened where the speed limit was 30, then driving well under the speed limit was appropriate. A dog not on a lead is a hazard and a good driver will recognise that, slow down, and prepare to stop quickly if necessary.

AdrianC

Nick_C wrote: »

If this happened where the speed limit was 30, then driving well under the speed limit was appropriate.

You appear to have been there, but don't appear to have known what the limit was...

A dog not on a lead is a hazard

Who said it wasn't on a lead? Not the OP.

giraffe69

You hit the dog and want compensation....if this was a child you would be facing procesution

It happened to me but with a fox not a dog and no the fox was not on a lead. I didn't claim despite it costing a few hundred pounds.
If I were travelling along at a sensible and legal speed for the conditions and a child ran out and was hurt why would I get prosecuted assuming the correct facts came out (perhaps another good reason for having a camera)?

AdrianC

A fox is a wild animal. There's nobody to claim from.

PasturesNew

Simby wrote: »

You hit the dog and want compensation....if this was a child you would be facing procesution

Have you considered paying the dogs vet bills due to the accident you caused by not paying attention

Who else should pay? It wasn't the OP's fault.

If this was a child the OP would not be facing prosecution; it'd be checked/investigated but it's not a prosecution unless proven the OP was in the wrong.

Sod the dog and dog vet bills, the OP, whether child or dog, was the victim.

The OP was paying attention; you can't always stop a car in less than 6" of road space when you weren't expecting it.

Car_54

PasturesNew wrote: »

If this was a child the OP would not be facing prosecution; it'd be checked/investigated but it's not a prosecution unless proven the OP was in the wrong.

Prosecution happens when the CPS or police think the OP was in the wrong. It's up to the court to decide whether it's proven.

Undervalued

Car_54 wrote: »

Prosecution happens when the CPS or police think the OP was in the wrong. It's up to the court to decide whether it's proven.

Actually it is when they think there is a realistic prospect of conviction (which is not the same thing) and it is considered to be in the public interest.

couriervanman

Car_54 wrote: »

Prosecution happens when the CPS or police think the OP was in the wrong. It's up to the court to decide whether it's proven.

And if driver was insured/not speeding/not drunk/not using mobile etc etc and driving with due care and attention the CPS wouldn't even bother

Shaun_of_the_Dead

couriervanman wrote: »

And if driver was insured/not speeding/not drunk/not using mobile etc etc and driving with due care and attention the CPS wouldn't even bother

If that were the case then the cps wouldn't even know about it.