Cyclist (a child travelling at speed, on the pavement) hit my vehicle, is a claim possible?

fatalist54

Hi all, 

Just after some advice regarding a situation with a young cyclist denting my bonnet (yes, he was going that fast) and crunching the right wing, causing deep scratching and paintwork damage.

The claim in question is regarding a child riding his bike on the pavement at quite some speed and had hit my stationary vehicle, on the right wing, as I was waiting to turn right out of my drive way (this was at roughly 2pm). After making sure the child was of course fine, a little bit shaken, but the helmet he wore definitely did it's job. He apologised for hitting my car and I'd collected some details from him - name, telephone number, address, if his parents where around to speak to etc.

A quick Google told me that as most cyclists aren't insured, I'd have to go about an informal arrangement for the damage to my vehicle to be paid for. About 20 minutes later I went to the address he'd given me and spoken to his dad, firstly asking how his son was, and then regarding how the dad wanted to pay for the damage, caused and admitted, by his son. The dad at this point was aware of the situation and was happy to talk but then again, didn't look too pleased that he'd have to cough up a small amount to get the damage to my vehicle sorted, he mentioned a few times he was at this point "unsure where the liability was" this made me slightly uneasy, but obviously reiterated quite clearly that his son shouldn't have been cycling on the pavement and he hit my car, not the other way round. I've lived in the same place for 3 years, so I'm absolutely always sure to take it easy coming out onto a main road over a pavement.

I that told him I was going to get some independant quotes and come back to him as soon as possible. He asked if he could go through his own insurance, I simply answered "that's a good question, I'm not sure but let's try and find out." Took his details, all good from here.

I went to a local registered accident repair centre, who assessed the damage and said I could actually go straight through them and they submit a 'no fault' claim on their side (essentially going through the dads insurance, so they pay for the damages), all stress free on my end and I'm not obliged to tell my insurer at this point anything, seemed quite good. They took my details, they took his details - ball was rolling. (something about Enterprise giving a hire car too.)

At this point I decided to go back and visit the dad and let him know the next steps - letting him know the accident repair centre would in touch, process the claim and it's all good. Because of the nature of the dads demenour after our first interaction, I decided to voice record this time round. 

This time he was slightly less pleasant, asked some questions around the cost, (I reiterated that the accident repair centre would be in touch, but it's through his insurance anyway) and he at this point mentioned that he still wasn't sure of liability according to a witness at the scene, and was waiting for a reply from his solicitor regarding next steps. He also then very openly admitted that his son was riding on the pavement, and shouldn't have been. Enough had been said from my end at this point, so I asked how his son was, he simply said "he's fine, he's gone back to school - didn't want him to miss anything"... 

Fast forward 5 hours later and things have taken a different tone. Below is a shortened version of the text I received from him. 

"Spoken to a solicitor, according to my description, he's convinced it's your responsibility and I should be the one claiming for my sons injuries."

Oh, you mean the description of an accident you didn't witness, already of the understanding that your insurance will cover the costs, and your sons injuries are so prevelant that he went back to school the same day? Glad I had this recorded.

At this point I didn't reply - but now I'm none the wiser what to do.

Any advice would be appreciated and thanks for reading this.

Grumpy_chap

Claim on your car insurance and they'll recover against the cyclist if there is a route.  

Or, just pay the cost of the damage.

Sandtree

How old was the child?
Was the child alone or was there any one accompanying them?
You need to give a better description of the accident... by the sounds of it you had already at least partially moved onto the pavement? Were you stationary at the time of the collision? How long had you been stationary if so? Any CCTV etc to confirm?


The garage is offering to sell pass your details to an accident management company who will provide credit hire and credit repairs. They are lying when they say you dont have to tell your insurers about the accident, no matter what you do you are obliged to inform them. 

If you look here and the Motor section you will see a lot of threads about credit hire in particular with people having to go to court to justify why they ran up a £35,000 hire bill whilst their £2,000 Fiesta was in for repairs but a part was on backorder. With the vast majority of credit hire/repair gigs you personally are only liable if 1) you commit fraud or 2) fail to support their attempts to recover their money. 

Make sure you read whatever they give you properly, many of those threads you'll see are people saying they thought they were signing for a courtesy car but it turned out to be credit hire. The language will be complex as they are trying to ensure their right to bring a claim in your name is protected as some big value cases were lost because the wording said directly that the hirer never would have to pay anything. 

It is possible that if the family have Home Contents insurance that it could cover them if any liability exists. 

dunstonh

The claim in question is regarding a child riding his bike on the pavement at quite some speed and had hit my stationary vehicle, on the right wing, as I was waiting to turn right out of my drive way (this was at roughly 2pm). 

From what you describe, it sounds as if your vehicle was across the pavement from your driveway to the road.   That can hinder any potential action you could bring.

Because of the nature of the dads demenour after our first interaction, I decided to voice record this time round. 

Did you tell him that you were recording the telephone call.  You may not be able to use it as evidence in a legal claim.

He also then very openly admitted that his son was riding on the pavement, and shouldn't have been.

How old was the child?  Children under 10 are below the age of criminal responsibility.  So, cannot have any prosecution for riding on the pavement and most police forces accept that young children should not be on the road and pavement use is fine.   The law is not explicit in exemptions but common sense is applied.

Any advice would be appreciated and thanks for reading this.

Your case is not open and shut.  It is certainly going to be frustrating to you but if you decide to pursue legal action then there is no guarantee you would win.    A counter claim could be made against you that you pulled across the pavement from your driveway in front of the child giving it an insufficient chance to react.  

Even if you go to court and win, there is no guarantee that your legal costs would be covered.   A judge could make a ruling that puts you partially to blame.  Those legal costs could be far higher than the repair costs.

If the parent is not going to do the honourable thing, you may find "realistic" options are limited and that legal options carry too much risk.

baza52

were you on the pavement or covering it at the time it happened?
Surely you should be giving way to pedestrians and children on bikes, did you not see him approaching your car

fatalist54

Sandtree said:

How old was the child?
Was the child alone or was there any one accompanying them?
You need to give a better description of the accident... by the sounds of it you had already at least partially moved onto the pavement? Were you stationary at the time of the collision? How long had you been stationary if so? Any CCTV etc to confirm?


The garage is offering to sell pass your details to an accident management company who will provide credit hire and credit repairs. They are lying when they say you dont have to tell your insurers about the accident, no matter what you do you are obliged to inform them. 

If you look here and the Motor section you will see a lot of threads about credit hire in particular with people having to go to court to justify why they ran up a £35,000 hire bill whilst their £2,000 Fiesta was in for repairs but a part was on backorder. With the vast majority of credit hire/repair gigs you personally are only liable if 1) you commit fraud or 2) fail to support their attempts to recover their money. 

Make sure you read whatever they give you properly, many of those threads you'll see are people saying they thought they were signing for a courtesy car but it turned out to be credit hire. The language will be complex as they are trying to ensure their right to bring a claim in your name is protected as some big value cases were lost because the wording said directly that the hirer never would have to pay anything. 

It is possible that if the family have Home Contents insurance that it could cover them if any liability exists. 

This is interesting. The child was cycling fast, away from his friends, on the pavement. 

There are two high walls (that do block a clear view of boths sides of the pavement) either side of the exit/entrance that so I always, without fail, take care and consideration when exiting in particular. It seems to me that he was going so fast that he couldn't actually brake fast enough, my car was about 50% over the pavement, damage just over the wheel arch and a dented bonnet...

I've not signed anything in terms of binding condition with the accident company, essentially wrote my name and address on a piece of paper - and the dad of the child. 

Would it be worthwhile going to the dad and mentioning the home insurance route, especially if he does accept liability? (additionally, if I was to secure proof.) 

baza52

so you drove onto the pavement with no means of checking if there were anyone using the pavement.
not sounding good for you.
I fail to see what speed the child was doing is relevant here

Sandtree

Misread that you were emerging from your driveway... thought you were turning onto it.

Age of the child is key... whilst criminal law can be considered from 10 civil law is even less clear cut.

If you were stationary or not is also highly important (and by stationary I mean more than a millisecond) - did he hit a static object that was there to be seen and avoided or did your vehicle suddenly move into his path.

Assuming the child is more like a teenager then there is a reasonable prospect of it being a split liability situation.

fatalist54

Did you tell him that you were recording the telephone call.  You may not be able to use it as evidence in a legal claim.

On the contrary, if I had have told him I was recording, he could've catered his responses/actions to go in his favour. This way I've allowed him to fully understand what's next and allowed him to give any more information, which he asked "how much do they reckon for the fix?" he's admitted his child was cycling on the pavement - and the fact his child "is fine, and he's gone back to school."

He also then very openly admitted that his son was riding on the pavement, and shouldn't have been.

Not sure of age, this wasn't mentioned - but he could be under 10 years old. 

From what you describe, it sounds as if your vehicle was across the pavement from your driveway to the road.   That can hinder any potential action you could bring.

The car was about 50% over the pavement, noting the location of the damage directly above the wheel arch.

Even if you go to court and win, there is no guarantee that your legal costs would be covered.   A judge could make a ruling that puts you partially to blame.  Those legal costs could be far higher than the repair costs.

If the parent is not going to do the honourable thing, you may find "realistic" options are limited and that legal options carry too much risk.

The more time I invest in this, the more unlikely it seems that this will go in my favour. 

fatalist54

baza52 said:

so you drove onto the pavement with no means of checking if there were anyone using the pavement.
not sounding good for you.
I fail to see what speed the child was doing is relevant here

The means of checking is by approaching the pavement slowly, allowing pedestrians to see the vehicle and either a) move out of the way, or b) walk in front of the vehicle with enough perception to see it's safe to do so. 

In any case, the child shouldn't have been riding the bike on the pavement. The speed he was going caused the damage to my vehicle. If he was cycling at a reasonable pace/pedestrian pace, then he absolutely would've had more than enough chance to use his brakes effectively and avoid causing an accident, minimalising any damage. Essentially, the speed factor here stipulates he should've been on the road.

csgohan4

pragmatically are you going to get any money back? Are you going to have a successful claim

if not and you claim through your insurer, or even tell your insurer without claiming, your premiums will likely increase for the next few years. 

The excess alone may be more than repair costs?