Accidental damage to car - question

[Deleted member 26715]

If A drives to B's house with B in the passenger seat, B then opens the door to hit the passing C did A park the car on the wrong side of the street/road facing oncoming traffic?

 

[cisamcgu]

The car is insured - end of story.

 

[graham bowers]

If you claim on your insurance I would expect the insurance company to claw it all back and more over the next few years. That's what happened to me when an untagged dog ran out in front of me and stuffed the front of my car.

 

[nickyboy]

All this could have been solved by A (and probably A's parents) talking to you and B immediately after the event rather than coming to some deal with C in isolation

But, you are where you are and a deal's been done with C and it's been paid.

So it really depends on how important the relationship is between A and B and maybe also between the respective parents. That will determine how much of the £250 you will be willing to pay

We had something similar recently. Son's friend damaged something of Son's. Initially the friend and friend's father were shifty about it and were trying to wriggle out of paying (it was a similar sum). Then friend's Mum got involved...she realised that if they didn't pay up then it would break any friendship (we are quite friendly with the parents and it would have had a knock on on the boys) so she made sure the repair was paid for. I suspect that if it was just some random acquaintance that we didn't know they would have refused to pay

 

[Milkfloat]

I wonder if those who feel I should pay up have money to spare each month. I don't. I couldn't find 250 even if I wanted to.
It was an accident, and that is, imo, why you have insurance.
If my daughter had kicked his parked car or chucked stones at it it would be a different matter.
I also don't think you can make an agreement and then expect someone else to pay.
As it is As parents have paid and as far as I'm concerned it's done with.
But thank you for your interesting opinions

If I were A and you as parent of B ruined my insurance record I would be coming after you in the small claims court. Your lack of funds have nothing to do with it, it is about responsibility. Think of it from A points of view. A was being nice by giving B a lift. B causes damage and walks away leaving A out of pocket. If insurance is involved both A and C are considerably out of pocket whilst all B has to worry about is looking like a tosser. Just because B did not do it on purpose does not mean they have no responsibility for their actions.

 

[Milkfloat]

Dont pay it, they should have told you from the beginning what was happening, not just spring it on you.

I think they have a cheek Sandra, its a lot of money and I'd just say no and tell them A, to claim on their insurance and not to approach you again about it. Basically they are taking the P.

I think that says a lot about you and not in a good way.

 

[Electric_Andy]

B is responsible. If it was heard in a small claims court (which I know doesn't technically exist in this country) then the actions of B caused the damage so B is responsible for putting it right. If B was a minor, their parents would be responsible; it would then be up to B's parents to either cover the costs themselves and/or to recover costs from B.

In the interest of abiding by the terms of insurance, A would be obliged to inform their insurance company of the damage but of course many people do not do this as sometimes it can push your premium up.

Whatever the case, I would say B is both legally and morally obliged to pay up.

 

[Jody]

Driver of the vehicle is responsible for their passengers.
Pistonheads

Ultimately the passenger bears liability, but the car's insurance is required to cover the liabilities of anyone "using" it, not just the driver. If you read the small print of your own insurance policy then under the third party section it will probably say something to the effect of "we will also cover the liabilities of anyone getting into or out of your car". So his insurers will end up paying.

That's how I have always understood it. B although carried out the action is not liable and neither is C.

 

[classic33]

That's how I have always understood it. B although carried out the action is not liable and neither is C.

I don't drive and I've always been told by those that do, the driver is responible for their passengers.

This includes the police who were contacted after I'd been hit by a bottle thrown by the passenger of a passing car. They had a word with the driver.

 

[Joffey]

Speak to A and say you should have been involved with the discussion as you could have got the repair done cheaper and as B is 15 it was you who should be sorting it, not A - I'd then offer to go halves with A. If A says no I'd advise C to take it up with A.

 

[Milkfloat]

On what basis would you claim? Do you even know what the rules are for establishing liability in tort cases involving minors (A being a minor)?

You also seem to have missed the point made very clearly by the OP - this has been settled without the involvement of the insurers.

The parent is responsible for the actions of the child. My comment about insurance is aimed at those saying that this is what insurance should be used for.

 

[Milkfloat]

Thanks for that.
What are you on about saying if you were A you would take Bs Mum to court for ruining your insurance record?, thats what insurance is for accidents which is what this was. You cant take people to court because your fed up about losing your no claims bonus and using a product as it was intended.
A and C have behaved really slyly and why should Sandra be out of pocket?. Ifs not her fault or her sons it was an accident.

Yes, I would be ensuring that I was not out of pocket, B caused the damage B and family B should take some responsibility and pay up. Why do you think that A and C should be out of pocket, they are the least to blame in all of this?

 

[Milkfloat]

No, they're not. There is no automatic vicarious liability for parents in England and Welsh law.

Not automatically, but generally that is the case.

 

[Profpointy]

All this arguing over the basic complaint of "It's not my fault, someone else must be to blame". We have heard all this several times before.

Isn't the argument "it is my fault but I believe the friend's mum should pay"?

 

[growingvegetables]

The parent is responsible for the actions of the child.

Taking that at face value, seems just about right then, that parents of young person A should cover the repair bill? Given that their child, A, was the driver in charge of the vehicle?

Plus ... they haven't inducted young person A very thoroughly into Accident Procedure Step 1 - "Do not accept liability. Exchange names and addresses."

Going off at a slight tangent - I remain uncomfortable at one element in the story so far. Young woman driving; 15-year-old lass opens door. Adult male has his car damaged. Hmm, I can imagine all sorts of scenarios, ways in which it was "sorted out". But I wasn't there.

However, I question whether dumping liability on the youngest person there is obviously, or necessarily, the correct option.