Advice on recovering money owed by neighbour

subjecttocontract

Sounds like he has changed his mind about paying you the money previously agreed. There is no legal bar about changing one's mind. Perhaps he now thinks, like me, he has no liability.

You, perhaps, need to correct, what I consider to be your wrong belief that there is always someone responsible when bad things happen. In this case, it's simply that the weather is at fault.

user1977

Insurance contracts no longer involve God, so I'm surprised the insurers are referring to him. The question is really whether your neighbour was negligent (in failing to secure big loose things liable to blow away in a well-publicised storm) or not.

pumas

I think Judge Judy would say he has acknowledged the debt by making payments.

WIAWSNB

Arty11 said:

Good morning,
thanks for all your replies. I can provide a bit more detail which will hopefully answer some of the questions ams suggestions that have been kindly offered. 

I was on talking terms with my neighbour as we met most nights when we were walking our dogs. I mentioned the big storm heading our way, it was a category Red storm with winds gusting to 80-90mph, and the need for taking precautions, battening down the hatches so to speak. 

He rubbished the idea that it would be an issue, and suggested it wouldn’t affect the area we live in despite all the evidence to the contrary. I locked my wheelie bins in the garage, he chose to do nothing. We still bump into each other in the passing but several weeks ago he began ignoring me and I sensed a change in his attitude to the agreement we reached.
It was my insurance company that used the term “an act of God”, and that I couldn’t use my motor legal protection to recover my excess as the damage was the result of a storm and not as a result of a traffic accident. I have fully comprehensive cover with added no claims protection. What’s the point of insurance eh?
All of our communications to date have been verbal, and were carried out on amicable terms and in good spirit. A gentleman’s agreement so to speak. He initially agreed to pay back the sum of money owed, and I was happy to do so under a flexible arrangement over a period of several months. 

From a legal standpoint, I’m uncertain that our verbal agreement holds any bearing, and whether his agreement to pay me back has set a legal precedent, an admission of liability if you like. 

Before taking the matter any further, I will speak with him again and clarify that his decision to stop making any further payments is final, then put it in writing what my expectations are, and my intentions. It is suggested that I put a deadline on the response and a statement that I’m prepared to take court action.

I will probably start legal proceedings via the small claims court which I believe is now called the simple procedure in Scotland. 

I was brought up to do the right thing by people and take responsibility for my actions or lack of them. I wish that none of this was happening. 

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my request. Arty.

Ok, the guy was lax. But, he did also hold his hands up regarding the seeming fact that his roof was not secured down. 

Ok, you don't have 'evidence' to pursue this conclusively - you cannot demonstrate that the guy had offered to cover the full excess. And, situations change as facts do. He probably has been since advised that he ain't all that culpable, certainly not to an unreasonable £850 policy excess. I can't imagine that this amount of excess is usual, tho' I haven't checked my own policy. 

I have a pretty good idea what excess I agreed when I last renewed - something in the order of £100 compulsory, and £200 voluntary, I think - and that is what I expect to cough up in the event of a claim. Nowhere, in my obtaining of quotes, was any exception to this amount mooted (subsidence excepted). 

Now, if I had chosen a cheapskate policy with an £800+ excess, would it be 'reasonable' of me to expect anyone else to pay this in the event of a claim? Take it to its silly logical conclusion - I didn't insure my car at all; should the neighbour cough up the total write-off amount?

This case is not morally clear-cut, imo, and also you do not have the required level of evidence to be confident in a victory, so I would personally take this as another act of gawd in you restoring good relations. Let's be clear - if you do pursue this, your neighbour will not be sending you a Chrimbo card. 

"I've been thinking about this, and it was decent of you to own up to knowing the roof wasn't secured. For my part, I'm going to be checking my insurance policy to make darned sure I'm better covered in future. Thanks for the £500 towards my loses, and I'm happy to call it quits there..."

£850 is a silly excess. 

 

Section62

pumas said:

I think Judge Judy would say he has acknowledged the debt by making payments.

Depends what evidence there is that payments have been made, and whether the payments can be linked to repayment of the insurance excess.

eddddy

pumas said:

I think Judge Judy would say he has acknowledged the debt by making payments.

You can make goodwill payments to people without any admission of liability.  Maybe because you feel sorry for them.  (Or maybe in an attempt to make them go away and stop bothering you. Lots of companies do that to get rid of complainers!)

The neighbour could say they paid the OP £500 or £850 or whatever other amount purely as a goodwill gesture.

subjecttocontract

Some insurance cover premiums can be reduced by agreeing to pay a larger excess. I also agree that £850 excess is excessive and possibly set in order to reduce op's initial insurance premium.

eddddy

WIAWSNB said:

Now, if I had chosen a cheapskate policy with an £800+ excess, would it be 'reasonable' of me to expect anyone else to pay this in the event of a claim? Take it to its silly logical conclusion - I didn't insure my car at all; should the neighbour cough up the total write-off amount?

Why do you say that's a "silly logical conclusion"?

If the neighbour was negligent, and their negligence resulted in the £4k worth of damage, the neighbour is liable for the full £4k.

So if the OP's insurer also thinks the neighbour was negligent - the insurer might chase the neighbour for the £3,150 they've had to pay out.


That's how comprehensive car insurance works.

For example, if a negligent driver crashes into you, your own insurer pays for the repairs (less the excess) then chases the negligent driver for repayment.

But if the negligent driver has insurance, the negligent driver can usually make a claim on their own policy to cover the repayment.

Section62

WIAWSNB said:

...

Take it to its silly logical conclusion - I didn't insure my car at all; should the neighbour cough up the total write-off amount?

....

Why is that 'silly'?  There's no legal requirement to insure a car which is just parked on a driveway.  If damage to the car is not covered by my house insurance then I'd certainly be asking the neighbour to pay for the damage their negligence had caused.

Arty11

user1977 said:

I would send a letter demanding payment of the balance (failing which you'll raise a small claim) and suggest that he passes it to his insurers (whether he's insured or not is his problem, not yours - the "act of God" stuff is probably his own nonsense).

I’ve taken legal advice and may have to go down that route. It’s sad that it’s come to this.