Forum menu
I know this sounds like a stupid question, but it's actually a serious situation.
To keep it brief;
I was doing some repairs on my grrlfriend's car.
I left it chocked with the handbrake off.
She removed the chock to move the car, while I was facing the other way so I didn't see what she was doing, not realising the handbrake was off.
The car started to roll away, she tried to stop it and got trapped between the car and my Land Rover, breaking both legs.
As I understand it, if she had allowed the car to roll in to me, I could claim off her and vice versa.
If she had driven in to my Land Rover and damaged it, I could claim off her.
If she had driven her car in to a solid object and damaged the car, she could claim off her own fully comp insurance.
So how does it work in this situation ?
We are both insured for her car, although neither of us were "driving" it at the time.
Can she claim for personal injury, the same as if she was claiming for damage to her own vehicle, with fully comp insurance ?
Ouch - nasty.
This is the greatest thread ever.
Graham - I salute you.
Really? If so first and foremost hope the breaks are not too serious and you back on your bike ASAP.
Can you sue her?
Ouch! I'm sorry, but what on earth possesses someone to step in front of a rolling 2-ton weight?
Technically the car was under your control wasn't it? Don't think you have to be driving.
I think you have a case against her for damages due to emotional trauma.
Ouch 😯
[i] If so first and foremost hope the breaks are not too serious and you back on your bike ASAP. Can you sue her?[/i]
It was his girlfriend who broke her legs.
😀
Mantastic, I'm OK and so is my Land Rover.
She removed the chock and she's the one who got injured.
Muddydwarf, I work with vehicles all the time and I've done heavy off road recovery. It's second nature to me to think about what's going to happen if it rolls away, the winch rope breaks, the jack slips or whatever and keep out of the way.
Some people react instinctively without thinking about the consequences.
Mantastic, I'm OK and so is my Land Rover
Thank God. I was worried for a bit.
Ask that fella outta east 17?
Pee taking aside hope she heals well
Technically the car was under your control wasn't it?
That could be the big question.
I left it in a safe position, she removed the chock.
Not that I'm trying to wriggle out of anything, I'm just wondering how the insurance company might see it.
But surely its like me trying to claim for my hammer falling on me or a circular saw im using cutting my hand off.
Basicly a non runner.
I left it in a safe position, she removed the chock.
Not that I'm trying to wriggle out of anything, I'm just wondering how the insurance company might see it.
Say it wasn't your gf though - some passing member of the public removed the chocks, I think the insurance co. would definitely say it was under your control.
Until the breaks heal at least...project - Member
Basicly a non runner.
Is it really that clear cut, project ?
Isn't that what fully comp insurance is for ?
I know people often don't bother claiming. If you do £200 worth of damege reversing in to a post, they'll only add £50 on to your premium for 5 years to get it back, so it's not worth it.
What if you wrote your own car off though ? Most people would claim if it was thousands at stake.
Rogg, what if it was a 750kg trailer with no brakes ?
Or a HGV trailer where the brakes can easily be released from outside ?
Could she possibly claim off of her house insurance for an accident at home rather than the car insurance?
I'd say you've been negligent in not securing it properly and your girlfriend needs to claim off your insurance. But really, this sounds like a complicated situation with no obvious answer.
Rogg, what if it was a 750kg trailer with no brakes ?
Or a HGV trailer where the brakes can easily be released from outside ?
OK, maybe the random member of the public argument doesn't hold up - you'd have the argument they shouldn't be on your land, or were acting in a criminal way by messing about with an HGV trailer.
Say it was someone un-related to you though, on your land, with your permission. If they removed the chocks I still think the insurance would be looking at you as the person who had control of the car. So it then seems logical that the same should apply now.
Also,the insurance is as much yours as it is hers if you're a named driver.
Apparently you should have nailed the chock to the floor says horatio
Not to point out the obvious but did she not think whys this chock here what could it be doing .
she wont do that again
Get well soon
Maybe she thought it was toblerone-on-a-rope?
She has caused the injury so no. The cause of the injury was the removal of the chock, not the absence of a handbrake.
Phone a few 'free advice' solicitors and see what answer you'll get.
ask the bloke out of e17?
http://www.shadyoldlady.com/location.php?loc=1179
You can only make a claim against a negligent party, if you remove re chocks on private driveway then pass into path of the rolling vehicle then you will be found to be negligent and cannot claim
against yourself
I do hope she heals quickly, poor girl has learnt a painful lesson about kinetic energy 🙁
MTG - i work in a toolroom, and there are often 10+ ton tools being craned about the shop, you learn very quickly about where to stand when these things are moving around.
Have you checked to see if she has taken out a life insurance policy on you??
Interesting point about negligence, scud.
Aren't most accidents caused by negligence of some kind though ?
She left the car in gear with the handbrake on, I left it chocked.
She thought I just had the chock there as an extra safety measure. It was lack of communication rather than negligence that made her think it was safe to remove it
What exactly are you claiming for?
MidlandTrailquestsGraham - MemberShe left the car in gear with the handbrake on, I left it chocked.
She thought I just had the chock there as an extra safety measure. It was lack of communication rather than negligence that made her think it was safe to remove it
negligence in a legal sense. Her 'thinking' you had the chock there as an additional safety measure is irrelevant. She failed to ensure that her action of removing the chock would not result in an unfavourable situation, whether involving personal injury or otherwise.
piedi di formaggio - MemberWhat exactly are you claiming for?
general damages for 2 broken legs and possibly any other losses that flow from that (eg. loss of earnings, care, special damages)
Hope the Misses recovers quick, sounds nasty.
negligence in a legal sense. Her 'thinking' you had the chock there as an additional safety measure is irrelevant. She failed to ensure that her action of removing the chock would not result in an unfavourable situation, whether involving personal injury or otherwise.
I like this. A lot.
I have an idea - ask your insurance company...
What is she claiming for? What loss has she sustained?
Arguably she took control of the car in removing the chock.
She can claim on fully comp policy?
[i]I have an idea - ask your insurance company...[/i]
Haha...worst idea ever! You need to ask someone independent, so you can get your story straight about who did what!
Its similar to a situation I've heard...an employee reversed his company vehicle onto his drive, and crashed into his own car. Company (self-insured) refused to pay out.
There is that but I assumed the OP isn't trying to defraud his insurance company.
Assuming you have fully comp insurance, there are two possibilities:
1. She claims for personal accident. AFAIK, liability is irrelevant, fact is that she was hurt due to an accident involving a car and so can claim some money from her OWN insurance. The amounts are never huge, probably a few hundred quid. The idea is that this will pay for immediate bills.
2. She makes a claim against YOUR insurance, on the basis that you caused the accident, and therefore you are liable for the costs of returning her to as close as possible to the state she was in before. This would cover the cost of all the best medical care, loss of earnings, etc. Lots of money. The tricky thing is that you would need to show that (a) the accident happened due to your own negligence, (b) your motor insurance policy covers you while you are doing some repairs on the car rather than driving it. Both of these I suspect would be tricky.
I think your best bet is to check third party liability insurance included with your home insurance.
To get anything other than a fixed benefits claim, she will need to reach the position where you are legally liable for the injury that she has sustained, and in this case I cant imagine that any of your insurance providers will be keen to concede that.
What it boils down to is that insurance covers you against the legal liability to pay damages to another party. It is impossible to be legally liable to pay yourself damages.
Don't worry you will both be getting a text message soon....
Our records indicate you may be entitled to 3750 pounds for you Accident. To claim for free, reply with YES to this msg. To opt out text STOP
Ladies love chocs, get well soon
This sure beats my mum cutting my dads fingers off with a meat cleaver ( razor sharp as my dad was a butcher at the time ) will be a story to tell the nieces and nephews in years to come once everyone is healed up the time i broke auntie mrs mtgs legs !
And one good thing has come of this thread mtg - ive just educated my mrs in - if a vehicles chocked /on stands / on a jack and im not about - leave it alone , find me or phone me before touching it ! Like you and muddy dwarf work for me involves knowing how to move heavy loads about for heri its teaching kids - dynamics of big loads are not always obvious !
I hope she makes a quick recovery and she doesn't try for a Darwin award again.
Fueled - MemberWhat it boils down to is that insurance covers you against the legal liability to pay damages to another party. It is impossible to be legally liable to pay yourself damages.
If you are fully comp and have an collision that is your own fault and get injured yo will still get compensation for those injuries
Neither of you were driving the car, and the car wasn't in a condition to be driven, so perhaps rather than just your respective car insurances I'd look at all your insurance policies, as although the accident involved a car, it could just as easily have been your grand piano that had rolled away and trapped her against your radiogram, it was wasn't a motoring incident - if the accident happened at home is there something in your household policy that covers liabilities to others, for instance.
Kinell, that's awful.
What it boils down to is that insurance covers you against the legal liability to pay damages to another party. It is impossible to be legally liable to pay yourself damages.
You're describing third party insurance. Comprehensive insurance covers both the liability to compensate others for your negligence AND your own loss. A person claiming for their own losses on their comprehensive policy doesn't have an obligation to pay themselves (which, you're right, would be absurd) but the insurance company does have an obligation to pay them (if it's a valid claim).