Accidental damage to car - question

[Sandra6]

Scenario is thus - young person A drives up to young person B 's house, parks and B opens the car door and hits a passing car belonging to grown adult C.
A and C seemingly have it sorted. Nothing is said to B for a number of days, then person A sends a message explaining it has been sorted without the involvment of insurance companies to the tune of £250, and ends the message with "I'm asking you to pay"
If you were person A, B or C what would you expect to happen?
Deal with it through insurance? Expect B to pay. Or accept as person A has "sorted" it they should pay?

 

[midlife]

A has vicarious liability a think as the driver....however I think B should cough up.

 

[Sandra6]

I should add, B is 15 and so it would be parents who had to cough up.

 

[Spinney]

B or B's parents should have been in on the discussion if they were expected to cough up. Not fair to spring it on them like that.

 

[robjh]

From your description, it sounds like B is to blame - and it sounds like you think that too.
C will rightly expect recompense from A and/or B, and won't care how that is split between them.
If B really is to blame, then it is unfair to leave the payment to A, so yes, B should pay.

The same principle would apply if going through insurance, as A would no doubt have an excess to pay plus lose no claims bonus. This case involving young people, the £250 is probably getting off lightly.

nb. just read your extra info that B is 15, but that changes nothing. It may well of course be B's parents that pay.

 

[User33236]

C would have a claim against the insurance of A who, as a young driver, will likely have an excess higher than £250. As B is at fault for the damage it would not be unreasonable for A to expect B to pay excess* therefore B appears to be benefiting from being asked to pay less.

* that aside from any ongoing increases in insurance premiums A may be asked to pay because of claim.

 

[Spinney]

I don't disagree that B should pay, but he/she/the parents could have been kept in the loop.

 

[NorthernDave]

Isn't the driver of the car legally responsible for the actions of their passengers?
Which would mean a claim against A's insurance policy quite legitimate. I'm fairly sure that A's insurance policy would have a clause allowing the insurance company to pursue B to recoup their outlay (even if this is rarely enforced)
If A and C agree a cash sum to keep their insurer out of it that's their business.
However, B opened the door so (morally, in my opinion) should cough up and should have offered to do so from the outset

Put it another way, if your car got damaged and you knew who'd done it, wouldn't you expect them to cover the cost rather than leaving you out of pocket?
£250 doesn't seem excessive.

 

[Drago]

Driver A's lawful responsibility as the driver of Vehicle 1. However, if they in turn decided to sue B for any losses they incur then they might have a case.

 

[guitarpete247]

I would have thought £125 each as driver, A, should have told passenger, B, not to open the door. And B should also have asked if it was safe to open the door or got out the other side.
I'm assuming that B was in the back otherwise they would have either got out onto the pavement or seen the car, with C in, coming

 

[Sandra6]

Full disclosure -I'm B's mum.
If I'd been in on the conversation I would've preferred for it to have been dealt with through insurance - as a third party claim I'm given to believe there wouldn't be any excess to pay.
Also, if I'd been consulted I could get the job done at cost.
I'm not happy at being asked for the money after it's already been agreed and paid.
Person A is due to move to Spain tomorrow so I'm not sure what's going to happen. My daughter has said she's willing to pay half out of her Saturday job wages.
Regardless I don't have a spare £125 right now.

 

[guitarpete247]

Plus teach your passengers the Dutch reach.

 

[midlife]

You can still go through insurance, there is no contract in place for you to pay. ...Aside from the moral aspect.

 

[Dave7]

Depends on whether you look on the situation from a moral/ethical view or a legal one.
I think if I was the parent of B I would suggest splitting the cost.........that way all parties are (possibly) happy.
If you go the legal route I would think A will end up with the bill.

 

[KnackeredBike]

Why don't you just tell the insurance company now and they can pay C if you want?

I'm assuming C isn't keen on having a not-fault claim on their insurance but so be it.

No matter what happens it will cost both parties (especially the at-fault) much more than £250 when it comes to insurance renewal.