We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Want to become a Forum Ambassador? Visit the Community Noticeboard for details on how to apply
Damage to paintwork by work colleague
Comments
-
The op is the innocent party. In which case there is no excess to pay .williamgriffin said:
Why should the op pay an excess? Go through the third party insurance if making a claim.Marvel1 said:Go through your insurance, do this now, they had their chance.
the guilty party pays all the costsmake the most of it, we are only here for the weekend.
and we will never, ever return.0 -
If they claim off their own insurance first they have to pay their excess, though as a guesture of goodwill some insurers will waive this in certain circumstances (normally a clear cut liability situation, full details of the driver and insurance details being given).McKneff said:The op is the innocent party. In which case there is no excess to pay .
the guilty party pays all the costs
This uninsured loss is recoverable from the third party/their insurers and assuming they have insurance or the means to pay it if they don't have insurance, the net impact will be nil but in the interim it could be payable.
If they claim directly from the third party insurers then there is never an excess to pay but to do requires liability and indemnity to have been resolved prior to them being willing to deal with the OP.0 -
yes their is a automatic door that opens and closes but any car can drive up to the gate and it will open. their is a sensor that makes the gate open,[Deleted User] said:
Is there anything to prevent public access?paul55555 said:car park is a private car park for staff0 -
This would appear to fall under R v Spence (1999), therefore, meaning the Road Traffic Act does not apply: Regina v Spence: CACD 24 May 1999 - swarb.co.ukpaul55555 said:
yes their is a automatic door that opens and closes but any car can drive up to the gate and it will open. their is a sensor that makes the gate open,[Deleted User] said:
Is there anything to prevent public access?paul55555 said:car park is a private car park for staff
The general principle seems to be that a car park is not a public place if the landowner or operator does not define it as such. Admission to a special class of persons, such as employees of a company using a company car park, does not a public place make. As such, all this stuff about failing to report does not apply. You can still pursue the matter privately or via insurance, however.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
