Is the owner of a car park liable for a broken lamppost that has damaged my car? If so, what do I do

user1977 · 29 November 2023 at 8:47PM

You drove off-road, and into a stationary object, and think it might be somebody else's fault? That isn't going to fly.

Bigphil1474 · 30 November 2023 at 9:09AM

Firstly, the lamp post area should have a kerb, evidenced by lack of lamp post, to prevent, or at least reduce the likelihood, of vehicles hitting said lamp post. Secondly, after the first collision with the lamp post, the duty holder should have made attempts to make the area safe to prevent any other collisions with the lamp post or what remains of it - it became a known risk even if it wasn't blindingly obvious in the first place. Thirdly, that lamp post stub is not adequately lit or highlighted to make it visible in the dark so that pedestrians or vehicle drivers could see to avoid it. Fourthly, the non-driving area is not adequately highlighted to differentiate it from the driving area in the dark (which it wouldn't be if the lamp post was still there and working).

OP, I'd say you have grounds for a claim as they are committing offences (Workplace safety). Is it worth it for a cracked bumper on a 15 year old car? I'd say not.

DullGreyGuy · 30 November 2023 at 10:12AM

At absolute best you'd get a token amount of liability to the carpark owner and even that is unlikely. Much more likely you will be held fully liable for hitting a static object which ultimately was there to be seen and avoided. The classic normal response will be "what if it had been an escapee toddler?"

The one case I recall where someone hit a static object and was only found 80% liable was a council owned streetlamp that was 2' into the road. The judge only awarded the 20% against the council explicitly because as a council they have a higher duty of care than the average person. I'm not convinced that a retail carpark owner would be equally held to such high standards.

Rosenkrantz · 30 November 2023 at 11:31AM

sheramber said:

Rosenkrantz said:

uknick said:

Looking at the picture, is the "block" paving where the lamp post is located meant for driving on? And, I think you mean "horizontal" to the ground not "perpendicular". Unless you knocked it down as shown in the picture.

Yes, whoops, I mean horizontal! Someone else knocked it over way before me. I think you're probably right and the block paving isn't meant to be driven on, but the only thing to indicate that would've been.... the lamppost, when it was intact. Otherwise, when it's dark, you can't see the difference.

Do you not have headlights on your car?

I do. It must have been just about visible when I arrived in the car park, but I probably didn't notice it. From the space I was in, it wouldn't have been visible to any driver even with their lights on.

Rosenkrantz · 30 November 2023 at 11:37AM

Mildly_Miffed said:

Rosenkrantz said:

Hi folks, would be grateful for some advice.

I was parked in the car park of a Pets at Home store at around 4:30pm and when I went to pull away, the front of my car went into the end of part of a metal lampost, and the bumper was severely cracked (luckily I wasn't hurt and nothing mechanical was affected). The post was almost perpendicular to the ground (I've attached a photo), and so not visible from inside the car at all, not to mention it was almost dark by that point. The Pets at Home manager told me that the post had been damaged around a year ago by another driver.

Confusingly, the owners of the carpark are Travis Perkins (who no longer have a store there), who I have not yet contacted. I'd like to know if it seems they would be liable for the damage and if so, how could I get them to pay for the repairs, presumably via their public liability insurance (the repairs probably exceed the value of my car, which is why I've not yet made an insurance claim as I don't want them to write it off!). Any suggestions as to the best way to proceed here? Thank you!

Can we clarify what happened, please?

You drove via the carpark's site roadways, heading leftwards from out of shot of the photo into the parking bay just visible in the right of the pic and parked nose-in, facing left?

You got out of your car, went shopping, came back, got back in... then just drove forward out of the bay, over the pedestrian bit visible, towards the roadway out of the car park?

You then reversed away, got out, stared in surprise at the stump of the lamp post, took a photo of it - in the lighting condition that the picture shows?

So when you parked nose-on to the stump, it was clearly visible in better lighting than shown - but you forgot it was there and simply assumed the way in front of your car was clear?

Certainly some raised kerbs would not be a bad idea, but I'd have said that was clearly enough visible to any pedestrians using the pedestrianised area to not be a problem.

Yes, pretty much. It's funny because someone is clearly aware that it's a risk as on Google Images it has an orange traffic cone placed over it, which would have mitigated at least some of the damage to my car, but that had obviously been removed at some point.

Rosenkrantz · 30 November 2023 at 11:41AM

Grumpy_chap said:

Rosenkrantz said:

the repairs probably exceed the value of my car, which is why I've not yet made an insurance claim as I don't want them to write it off!

In that case, whether or not you have a claim against the car park owner / operator may well be moot.

If you had a valid claim against the car park owner / operator, then they will pass the matter to their insurers to resolve. If the insurers then accept that claim, the insurer will determine the value of the repair as exceeding the value of the car and write it off.

The only way to avoid an insurer writing off the car when the damage repair is more than the value of the car is self-repair or no repair.

FWIW, I don't think there is a claim against the car park owner / operator as an insurer would assess this as being your fault (you drove the car into a stationary object). The very best an insurer might find is a contributory factor by the car park owner / operator but any such factor is likely to be a small fraction.

How bad is the damage to your car? Can you just live with it?

Thanks. It's only cosmetic, really - the bumper needs replacing. I think I'll just pay for it to be repaired myself.

Stateofart · 1 December 2023 at 4:57PM

I would say that lampost is on the walkway, not the space and you won't have much of a leg to stand on. My guess is that OP thought it was clear as there was no raised bricks, chanced it going forward only to hit a lampost they didn't see.

rollingmoon · 1 December 2023 at 5:52PM

Rosenkrantz said:

Thanks. It's only cosmetic, really - the bumper needs replacing. I think I'll just pay for it to be repaired myself.

Seems sensible, as I would concur that you have little chance of anyone else paying for it given the circumstances. The big mistake you made, of course, was reporting this to your insurance. Even though you've not made a claim, just watch them bump up your renewal next year.