Personal Injury Claim that includes my dog’s I juries

Jenni_D

I know to us they are not just dogs - they are family. But the guys above are right - in the eyes of the law they are merely possessions (goods, chattel) - and should be treated as such in any insurance claim.

Sandtree

Undervalued said:

Any dog, legally speaking, is property.

So it is no different from if, say, you had an expensive camera round your neck and it was damaged in the accident. If the driver of the van was at fault then they are liable for both your injury and the cost of repairing or replacing any property that was damaged.

I agree fully, and said the same earlier, however there is one point of difference but I cannot remember ever dealing with a claim for an injury for an animal (most cases we are claiming against the owner of the animal).

If you had a brand new £2,000 camera and it was damaged and sent off for inspection and the engineer said it would cost £2,500 to fix then it would be deemed beyond economical repair and so a settlement of £2,000 would be paid to indemnify for the loss of the camera.

At what point does a pet become beyond economical repair @Undervalued ? Would the third party be liable for £30,000 of vet bills to a mutt? Would certainly be a brave insurer that said they'd only pay the cost of putting the animal to sleep and £50 for a replacement from the local pound.