Child run into side of my car causing damage + small claims court
Options
Comments
-
Nope. Generally people are responsible for their own wrongdoing - nobody else's. Parents are not usually liable for damage caused by their children. At least, not legally. Morally some people might argue that they are - but if you're talking about the small claims court then you're talking about legal responsibilities, not moral ones.
To claim against the parents you would have to demonstrate that the parents themselves were negligent in some way, for example by persuading the judge that a reasonable parent would not have allowed an 8-year old to play outside unsupervised. Don't think you'd get very far with that one.
Alternatively you could file a claim against the child personally, but you might run into 2 problems:
First, negligence on the part of a child is assessed on the question of whether they took the level of care that would be expected of a reasonable (8-year-old) child, which is obviously much lower than the level of care expected of a reasonable adult. It's difficult to prove negligence on the part of a child, and impossible in the case of very young children who have little or no concept of their actions' consequences.
And second, an 8 year old child is unlikely to have £190 in his piggy bank, so even if your claim is successful you're unlilely to get paid (as above, the parents would have no obligation to pay on the child's behalf).
Alternatively you could accept that !!!! happens and that you can't always demand that someone else pays for every bit of misfortune that befalls you in life, and put it down to experience.
This is superb advice and spot on. I would guess this poster is a solicitor or injury claims handler based on their advice.
The only thing I would add is a caution that if you take this to a civil claim against the child it will need to go before a judge. The Childs age means the judge can not find contributory negligence against the child. In practice this means you have to demonstrate you did everything possible to avoid the collision. You have stated this is a 20mph zone so the duty of care on drivers to watch for children would be even higher. Simply not having seen the child prior to his running out could be enough to sink your claim.
I cannot stress strongly enough that you need to report this to your insurer now. They will obtain all the witness statements now whilst it is fresh in everyone's mind and a copy of the police report and hold it all on file pending a possible claim. The child has 13 years to bring a claim.
If you fail to tell your insurer and then fail to mention it when taking out your next policy you run the risk of your policy being voided for false representation if a claim comes in a couple of years down the line.0 -
I must agree with others about informing them. There's witnesses and logs. Don't inform them? You will be in a world of hurt when the mother inevitably decides she can pay for his university tuition fees with a nice big lump sum.
It's a tough break. I live in a road where kids routinely use the road as a football pitch, cricket pitch, all kinds of things. Of course there's balls hitting your car and there's nothing you can do. What's more, they too, like to be dangerous when crossing the road. Ultimately, you just have to be careful and learn from this experience.
I don't have an issue with you owning a BMW. Certain people on this forum do though.0 -
Warwick_Hunt wrote: »But what's the point? An 8 year old is unlikely to have the means to pay.
Indeed. That's why I said as much in post #22.0 -
-
[...] In practice this means you have to demonstrate you did everything possible to avoid the collision. You have stated this is a 20mph zone so the duty of care on drivers to watch for children would be even higher. Simply not having seen the child prior to his running out could be enough to sink your claim.
Or even enough for a counterclaim to succeed.
OP admits he was stopped in a 20mph (hence, high risk) area, then started to move again at (or around) the same time a running child came onto the road.
Poor little Timmy may have only suffered bruises but he's been having nightmares since and refuses to go play outside anymore, your Honour.0 -
I really don't care about cars, but if it's only going to cost you £190 to repair an immaculate whatever that seems pretty good to me. My 8 year old and less-than-immaculate Hyundai i20 today had a service and MOT with some rectification work for £300.
Now that was a forseable and budgeted for expense, and I accepted it as part of the cost or running a car. If you're running a more expensive model, any model, and are so worried about £190, even if the circumstances were annoying and unexpected, then perhaps you too should get a cheaper car?0 -
silverwhistle wrote: »I really don't care about cars, but if it's only going to cost you £190 to repair an immaculate whatever that seems pretty good to me. My 8 year old and less-than-immaculate Hyundai i20 today had a service and MOT with some rectification work for £300.
Now that was a forseable and budgeted for expense, and I accepted it as part of the cost or running a car. If you're running a more expensive model, any model, and are so worried about £190, even if the circumstances were annoying and unexpected, then perhaps you too should get a cheaper car?
I really don't think the anti BMW stuff is all that clever. Driving a Hyundai doesn't make you hip and cool. There's no correct way..... Although in the eyes of MSE owning an Audi or BMW makes you evil.0 -
... Although in the eyes of MSE owning an Audi or BMW makes you evil.
To be honest, in my case it was the other way round. I've always been evil, which is why I chose to drive a BMW.
On the other hand, I indicate correctly, overtake only when (a) it's safe and (b) I'm reasonably certain the person I'm overtaking will feel it's safe, stay within (a reasonable margin of) speed limits, and neither lane hog nor weave in & out of the left lane like some drunk orangutan on DCs. Oh, and I don't move my car into the path of running kids.
It's all part of my evil pan to confuse other drivers seeing a BMW being driven like that :cool:0 -
"It's what you have insurance for".
Why should the driver have to risk higher premiums because of damage caused by someone else?
Would the same people who make this statement feel the same if they were passing a horse that got spooked and it caused damage?0 -
Although in the eyes of MSE owning an Audi or BMW makes you evil.
Strange, I don't get that impression from MSE, only the forum contributors. Two entirely different entities.“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”
<><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards