Child damages your car....

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Parents were apologetic and offered to pay for the damage regardless of cost as the door was 2 week old, i got the quote, gave them it and then decided they would ask their family solicitor, which obviously told them legally they dont have to pay for anything thats what car insurance is for.

That's interesting - I've always wondered what the legal standpoint is for this situation.

I am surprised though that if you had evidence of someone else causing damage to your property that they are not responsible for paying repairs.
 
When I was a youngling playing cricket on a green beside a sort of side street, I somehow let go of a cricket bat which flew through the air and landed bang in the middle through my friends dads brand new bmw. I already had an interest in cars and I burst into tears thinking A, my dad is going to kill me and B, I’ve just thrown a bat at a beautiful car!

His dad claimed through insurance and my dad offered up some money towards costs, he declined but only as I was friends with his son

I’d expect the family to at least offer, I’d make a point of having a smart repairer round in full view repairing at a time I know that neighbour is home!
 
Yes, if you have it on camera, they should pay for it. Parents should be liable for their children. If they get sh!tty about it, take them to small claims court. Don't get emotional and keep the conversation factual. It's not personal and they should understand that.
 
That's interesting - I've always wondered what the legal standpoint is for this situation.

I am surprised though that if you had evidence of someone else causing damage to your property that they are not responsible for paying repairs.

With kids there is the issue of the of responsibility. Youngsters aren't considered to be responsible.

If the kids not legally responsible then what about the parents? Well that's blurry as well. If the kid did something while munder supervision of the parent then there's a stronger case. But kids going about their normal activities/play and not under direct supervision - then it's difficult legally to show that the parents are responsible.

Most parents I know would be mortified if their kids damaged somebody's property and would try and make reasonable restitution - but this has its practical limits - and for higher costs to repair then they'd be more likely thinking covering an inusrance excess rather than the total costs of repair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 219
I know it’s probably a very long time ago, but did you never have an accident when you were a child? Maybe kicked a ball a bit too hard and it hit a neighbours window? Or are you one of those saints that did nothing wrong when you were a child?

It is not about a child having an accident - it is about (parent and child) taking responsibility for their actions and not skulking off like a thief in the night.

I was (and so was my son) brought up to be honest about my actions and take responsibility. If I'd damaged somebody's car, I'd have told my dad (knowing I'd be in trouble - but also knowing that my problems would be much worse if I did not tell him and he found out by other means), he'd have gone to the neighbours and offered to pay to repair the damage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 219
With kids there is the issue of the of responsibility. Youngsters aren't considered to be responsible.

If the kids not legally responsible then what about the parents? Well that's blurry as well. If the kid did something while munder supervision of the parent then there's a stronger case. But kids going about their normal activities/play and not under direct supervision - then it's difficult legally to show that the parents are responsible.

Most parents I know would be mortified if their kids damaged somebody's property and would try and make reasonable restitution - but this has its practical limits - and for higher costs to repair then they'd be more likely thinking covering an inusrance excess rather than the total costs of repair.

Strangely, I happened to catch a trailer for "Judge Rinder" earlier whilst channel surfing and he stated as part of his invitation to the show "Has someone damaged your property and you want to be reimbursed for the damage".

It's probably an open and shut case with adults but as you state - difficult with a child. I wonder how it would play out in a court if someone took it that far.
 
I’ve got a funny feeling that some posters haven’t read the link posted by @grober...
 
I’ve got a funny feeling that some posters haven’t read the link posted by @grober...

Yeah, I missed that one.
 
Strangely, I happened to catch a trailer for "Judge Rinder" earlier whilst channel surfing and he stated as part of his invitation to the show "Has someone damaged your property and you want to be reimbursed for the damage".

It's probably an open and shut case with adults but as you state - difficult with a child. I wonder how it would play out in a court if someone took it that far.
Good suggestion, if Judge Rinder rules in your favour ITV pays so everyone wins!

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
I admit I hadn’t, but my point about it being more than just financial is still relevant.
I fully understand that, and if I was the child’s father I’d pay to fix the damage, it’s more of a riposte to some of the people talking about how the child’s parents are liable from a legal point of view - they’re not.
 
Yes, if you have it on camera, they should pay for it. Parents should be liable for their children. If they get sh!tty about it, take them to small claims court. Don't get emotional and keep the conversation factual. It's not personal and they should understand that.

Taking someone to small claims court will in the end cost you more than the cost to repair the damage in the first place, i agree parents should be liable and the ones that are fair like myself take full responsibility should their children cause damage to anyone's property, there are also the others that just don't care I've got a few like that on our estate and I've had words with their kids myself and glad to say it works, they avoid going near my car like the plague.
 
I’ve got a funny feeling that some posters haven’t read the link posted by @grober...

I hadn't seen that but useful to know.

However, we are also talking about the moral responsibility of the parent and common decency.

Any decent person would pay for the damages.
 
If this is the case why do the Police ask for any such video evidence and use it to prosecute defendants??? And going even further, what about Dashcam footage, is that not used as evidence in court?

And your quote stating that CCTV Evidence is inadmissible is incorrect, it is used all the time!
Yes...and no. It depends on the case and how good the other guys lawyer is. If they can prove the CCTV/audio was acquired illegally it can not be included in the case bundle as evidence. I did not say all CCTV footage is inadmissible as evidence.
 
Reminds me of my own such case, one of my kids and his mates discovered the lock combination to their friends bikes, unlocked it and 'hid' it for a laugh....bloody thing got nicked from the place they hid it ! Muppets.

Me and 3 other parents coughed up for the cost of a replacement bike for the kid. Thankfully it was not one of those massively expensive bikes you see kids leave lying outside the local take away these days...usually unlocked.:rolleyes:
 
At the end of they day you've got kids, bikes, scooters, footballs and cars on drives. Stuff happens.

I’d like to think I would take the same approach as this too. Despite that the UK is in general a safer place than ever, kids just don’t get enough time playing outdoors these days compared to the past, and I wouldn’t want to making parents even more scared to let their kids out.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom