Cracked/broke my F-ing front splitter in a council public car park
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cracked/broke my F-ing front splitter in a council public car park
The car park had concretre bollards around the perimiter (3ft tall) one must uf been brooken at some point & was poking up all jagged about 5/6 inches. backing into a spce & could not see it, caught the corner front near side & broke it, Im not to pleased , the post should of been removed fully & not left poking up, I don't suppose there is much point in trying to claim,
Bought a disposable camera & took Pics of the car park, post & car..
What do you think.. Witness in the shop opposite also.
Cheers
Dean
Bought a disposable camera & took Pics of the car park, post & car..
What do you think.. Witness in the shop opposite also.
Cheers
Dean
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Bucks
Posts: 3,213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Initial response is likely to be that you should have spotted that there was a hazzard and not hit it. If you can establish how long the bollard has been broken you may be able to lever them into some form of compensation. i.e. If it's been bust for months.
Regardsless of you breaking your car, this is clearly a 'trip hazzard' in a public place.
J.
Regardsless of you breaking your car, this is clearly a 'trip hazzard' in a public place.
J.
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Founder of surreyscoobies.co.uk
Posts: 2,889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at it this way, if you were to reverse into a caterham 7 and said "i didnt see it" you would have to pay for the damage to yours and their cars, why should it be any different reversing into an object that has done nothing more than being there.
andy
andy
#5
you can claim against it, andy's logic doesnt apply because the caterham is a moveable object and pposes as a hazard directly linked with a car park, i.e. you should be extra aware, but a cracked paving stone is showing a 'lack of duty of care' meaning that the council has a duty to patrons using the car park that it free of damaging objects that shouldnt be there.
To be honest you could take a picture of it, take a picture of your car, preferebably witha date, witnesses and a rude letter to the council. If they pay then they'll pay if not then you'll end up in the small claims court and thats hardly the bother
To be honest you could take a picture of it, take a picture of your car, preferebably witha date, witnesses and a rude letter to the council. If they pay then they'll pay if not then you'll end up in the small claims court and thats hardly the bother
#7
Originally Posted by automodellistagt
you can claim against it, andy's logic doesnt apply because the caterham is a moveable object and pposes as a hazard directly linked with a car park, i.e. you should be extra aware, but a cracked paving stone is showing a 'lack of duty of care' meaning that the council has a duty to patrons using the car park that it free of damaging objects that shouldnt be there.
To be honest you could take a picture of it, take a picture of your car, preferebably witha date, witnesses and a rude letter to the council. If they pay then they'll pay if not then you'll end up in the small claims court and thats hardly the bother
To be honest you could take a picture of it, take a picture of your car, preferebably witha date, witnesses and a rude letter to the council. If they pay then they'll pay if not then you'll end up in the small claims court and thats hardly the bother
I got a pay out for 100% costs on my old car when I hit a raised man hole and damaged the side skirt on one side. I got a quote from ford approved body shop and sent all the evidence over, did not hear anything for about 3 weeks. Forgot about it - one day got a letter with a cheque for 800 quids.
Trending Topics
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Stirling
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your will have to prove negligence by the Council, if they have a reasonable inspection system in place and they were unaware of the defect then they will most likely defend it all the way.
If you can prove the defect was there for a long time and that it had been reported several times to the Roads Dept. and they were well aware of it it will be paid straight away.
Rude/huffy letter will get you nowhere as it will most likely be passed to the Third Party Administrator Company.
The majority of Local Authorities self-insure themselves to save on premium costs.
If you can prove the defect was there for a long time and that it had been reported several times to the Roads Dept. and they were well aware of it it will be paid straight away.
Rude/huffy letter will get you nowhere as it will most likely be passed to the Third Party Administrator Company.
The majority of Local Authorities self-insure themselves to save on premium costs.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ossett2k2
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
15
23 September 2015 09:11 AM