Damage to my car
Comments
-
I haven't read through all the entries but this is purely a civil matter no need to report to police. The incident occurred on private land to which the general public do not have access to and therefore not subject to the Road Traffic Act. I'm surprised that the police agreed to take any details and provide an incident number. Whether the child was injured or not is irrelevent (fatality excepted).
I agree DD your interpretation is correct.
I would also question the bolded statement. What level of injury, short of fatal, wouldn't the police be interested in?
0 -
Many people just freeze in such situations.
For the whole 5 secs? That's a long time to freeze!!
Sounding his horn may have just spooked the kid and made things worse. In this case the drivers decision, right or wrong in hindsight, was his and his alone. Moving the outfit may also have made things worse but again the drivers decision, right
or wrong in hindsight, was his and his alone.What cannot be in dispute is that if the child had been adequately supervised the incident would not have happened.
I simply don't understand why some contributors insist on trying to blame the driver and / or CC Ltd. Perhaps it is because they recognise their own shortcomings. Would they be saying the same if the kids had hit a bollard, a pitched caravan,
a wall, or any other stationary object. Perhaps CC Ltd should now put soft rubber buffers every where.Edit: perhaps not rubber as that could bring about latex allergic reactions
. OMG will it never stop.Were you there or just guessing? It was said that the kid was looking behind him ..... he could have been looking at Dad/Mum. I thought a horn was to warn others of your presence .... sounds just the situation where a blast of the horn would have been perfect
0 -
and I wasn't blaming the driver per se,I just can't believ how a mountain has been made of a mole hill.
I fear it is very unlikely there is only one mole hill. Like a lot of news it only ever gets reported if it is bad enough. Scratches on cars, or even slightly damaged kids, are probably not going to be widely reported. Especially if the member does not frequent
CT. Unfortunately the only time we are likely to hear of it is when it is extremely serious. Perhaps the CC should publish accident statistics by type, at least then we would know if there was a specific problem or not.0 -
Please, not another request for a set of statistics? Have folk lost all sense of perspective here? As I've just posted on the "cycles" thread, these are isolated incidents (I'm not for a moment condoning 8 year old children cycling unsupervised around site.)
But do we really want (or even think it's possible) CC sites to become sterile 100% risk free environments? They'd be very unusual places if so!
0 -
Please, not another request for a set of statistics? Have folk lost all sense of perspective here? As I've just posted on the "cycles" thread, these are isolated incidents (I'm not for a moment condoning 8 year old children cycling unsupervised around site.)
But do we really want (or even think it's possible) CC sites to become sterile 100% risk free environments? They'd be very unusual places if so!
I am sorry M, how can you say they are isolated?. The only way we can be sure is if the CC respond to this thread. Unlikely I know. However, it is supposedly a club, so it is not unreasonable for this sort of information to be made available.
0 -
Please, not another request for a set of statistics? Have folk lost all sense of perspective here? As I've just posted on the "cycles" thread, these are isolated incidents (I'm not for a moment condoning 8 year old children cycling unsupervised around site.)
But do we really want (or even think it's possible) CC sites to become sterile 100% risk free environments? They'd be very unusual places if so!
I am sorry M, how can you say they are isolated?. The only way we can be sure is if the CC respond to this thread. Unlikely I know. However, it is supposedly a club, so it is not unreasonable for this sort of information to be made available.
Because in our, admittedly infrequent, stays on CC sites we've seen very few of the sorts of incidents being talked about here. But, again, admittedly, we don't spend much time on site keeping statistics!
0 -
I would say five times out of six.
0 -
......
Were you there or just guessing? It was said that the kid was looking behind him ..... he could have been looking at Dad/Mum. I thought a horn was to warn others of your presence .... sounds just the situation where a blast of the horn would have been perfect
If it’s me that you are referring to MM then I have no idea what so ever how or why the driver reacted as he did. He probably has no idea himself. As Fysherman intimated people react in very different ways to identical events. As far as I am concerned
until proven differently he did exactly the right thing. In any event it would appear he is blameless.Indeed .... I was on my phone & it's a bit difficult to edit on this crappy forum where you've no idea who said what & when. Maybe, but he/she certainly knew how to escalate it to stratospheric levels .....
0 -
I would say five times out of six.
I would estimate 90% of sites we visit having groups of children cycling around in both directions and at speeds over 5mph at weekends but less than 5% of time it causes a problem.
0 -
Wow, how people see things is really strange. I'm not sure where to start clearing up people's comments.
I said 5 ish seconds which may have been 3 and may have 7, the reason we didn't sound our horn was we believed the child would look around and see the car, it was only as he got within a meter ish (don't hold me to the distance)
we realised he wasnt going to look the right way but by then it was too late.Those people who think we are going OTT obviously haven't been in our situation or don't have a new car or care that much about their car. We, like most other people work long and hard to afford a car/new car and we take care
of it and our possessions so when something of ours gets damaged its a big deal to us.Someone said it might not go through insurance - the quick answer to that is I hope it doesn't but if I want to go through my insurance I will and can as like others have said that's what we pay for and its solely my choice, not
the boy's parents.Im sure I've missed out loads of comments from others but to hear people's thoughts are good and I do thank you for them. If people want to leave negative comments can you try and do it constructively please. Cheers.
0 -
Legally the only person you could sue would be the boy but he is worthless. I am afraid the only thing you can do is to rely on the parents promise.
Not sure why the repair has anything to do with the manufacturers. Assuming this is just the paint that is damaged then repainting can be done by any competant person. Frankly you are more likely to get paid by the parents if you keep the cost down or if
they are insured you might find the insurer will get it done for you to keep their costs down.Write
Not correct Wildwood.
1. The car is new, so must be repaired to manufacturer's specification to preserve the rustproof warranty.
2. The parents are responsible for the actions of their children.
3. Their household insurance (if they have any) will indemnify them for this damage under the Personal Liability section. Caravan insurance may also provide similar cover.
Sorry but the parents are not responsible for the actions of the child, I have dealt with these cases.
The house contents policy gives the cover but it is for their legal liability and therefore a claim is unlikely to succeed.
Provided the repair is done correctly then the warranty should not be affected but in any event should be undetectable.
0 -
Legally the only person you could sue would be the boy but he is worthless. I am afraid the only thing you can do is to rely on the parents promise.
Not sure why the repair has anything to do with the manufacturers. Assuming this is just the paint that is damaged then repainting can be done by any competant person. Frankly you are more likely to get paid by the parents if you keep the cost down or if they are insured you might find the insurer will get it done for you to keep their costs down.
Write
Not correct Wildwood.
1. The car is new, so must be repaired to manufacturer's specification to preserve the rustproof warranty.
2. The parents are responsible for the actions of their children.
3. Their household insurance (if they have any) will indemnify them for this damage under the Personal Liability section. Caravan insurance may also provide similar cover.
Sorry but the parents are not responsible for the actions of the child, I have dealt with these cases.
The house contents policy gives the cover but it is for their legal liability and therefore a claim is unlikely to succeed.
Provided the repair is done correctly then the warranty should not be affected but in any event should be undetectable.
This is wrong.
As a child or young person you can be sued for negligence through your parent. Negligence is defined as failure to act with reasonable care thus causing damage to other people or property. An injured party has the right to sue for compensation. An example of negligence is riding a bicycle in a manner which results in personal injury or damage to property.
A parent can be held liable for their child’s negligence if the parent failed to take reasonable care to see that the child did not cause harm to others.
I would suggest the OP speaks to the Club's legal bods - they are in my experience very helpful.
0 -
Whilst the site is open it is classed as private land with public access and the road traffic act does then apply. For a more detailed understanding try:
Write your comments here...I disagree, the site is only open to members and access is prevented by a barrier( in most cases. ) there is no implied right of entry to anyone who are not members unless invited by the warden, this stops them being public roads
and are not subject to the road traffic act , it seems to say the same in the linkso i agree with the poster who stated this was not a matter for the police so would be interested to know what sort of report they created, it's not a road traffic collision within the terms of the act and its not a crime (criminal damage) it's a civil
matter so either insurance company, claims management, or small claims court if it is not resolved amicably.0 -
Hi all. Can anyone give me some advice on my car being damaged on a caravan club site? Basically an 8 year old boy crashed his bike into the side of my car scratching it badly. The site warden filled in an "incident report" but I've been told I can't have
a copy of it? The boy's parents said they would pay for the damage to be rectified. I asked what insurance they would use and the dad said he wasn't sure as it was on private land involving a minor. It didn't fill me with confidence.I have been to the police and have a crime/incident number.
Write your comments here...Not sure about the term private land. I remember many many years ago (it must have been in the club mag, before internet etc) there was discussion about drinking and driving. Someone made a comment that they could not be "done"
being on private land. I beleive that a club site is deemed by the law as used by members of the public and as such were subject to any laws which are applicable to any highway. I would suggest that the responsibility for the damage of this would be fair and
square on the child's parents, although to get a result may involve going through a private legal action......maybe take the parents offer and quit. I also thought that situations like this are covered by your home insurrance eg: if your dog bites the post
man.0 -
Whilst it is not particularly relevant here I do not believe a Club site would be considered "public" since the land is privately owned and in general access to it is restricted to those given permission to access it by the Club i.e they are a "special"
class of the public not the "general" public. Were this not the case any Motorhome owner having a tipple would potentially be guilty of an offence !0 -
Hi all. Can anyone give me some advice on my car being damaged on a caravan club site? Basically an 8 year old boy crashed his bike into the side of my car scratching it badly. The site warden filled in an "incident report" but I've been told I can't have
a copy of it? The boy's parents said they would pay for the damage to be rectified. I asked what insurance they would use and the dad said he wasn't sure as it was on private land involving a minor. It didn't fill me with confidence.I have been to the police and have a crime/incident number.
Write your comments here...Not sure about the term private land. I remember many many years ago (it must have been in the club mag, before internet etc) there was discussion about drinking and driving. Someone made a comment that they could not be "done"
being on private land. I beleive that a club site is deemed by the law as used by members of the public and as such were subject to any laws which are applicable to any highway. I would suggest that the responsibility for the damage of this would be fair and
square on the child's parents, although to get a result may involve going through a private legal action......maybe take the parents offer and quit. I also thought that situations like this are covered by your home insurrance eg: if your dog bites the post
man.The description of a highway is very wide and it could i clude the roads on a club site. I did become involved in the thread referred to. The point at that time was could someone driving within the site be convicted of drink driving.
At that time a driver on a private caravan site with a barrier found that the court still regarded this as a public highway and convicted the car driver. It is possible that it may not apply to a club site limited to members but it is possible it is a public
highway on the basis of the previous decision but it has not been tested as far as I know.0 -
Pushed for time so no long response.
The "Club" is not a club, it is a limited company using a trading name. It does not trade or act as a club.
Most CC Ltd site are open to "non members" (the general public).
The types of barriers used are not to prevent access but to act as controls which suggest access is expected.
Even if the land was private bringing in the police was the right thing to do as by placing the incident on formal record it protects the interests of all of the parties should anything go wrong later.
Write your comments here...I just think you are wrong, a club site is for paying customers, the barrier is there to prevent access to non paying customers, therefore it isn't a right for public access. Maybe this should be a separate thread to discuss but as a previous poster mentioned if the site was classed as roads under the road traffic act then any motorhome user who was drinking( over the limit) in their motor home would be guilty of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle if they are in possession of their keys, just like parked at side of the road or in a layby. Of course I don't believe this to be the case. Due to the fact they are private
0
.
