MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
So in from work to find out the wifes car has been in a scrape.
She was visiting her mum in the nursing home and went to leave only to find her car boxed in by 2 staff cars on double yellows opposite (they were there because work was happening in the staff car park seemingly). Tried paging owners to move them but no joy. A staff member came out to see if he could help and said my wifes car could get out. My wife refused saying she would scrape the car next to her. He said to my wife he would move her car for her. He did so and off my wife went. Wife then gets a call to say her car has scraped the car next to her and in doing so scrapped the car next to her, on inspecting her car there is a scrape on the rear wheel arch so looks like it has hit the car. Now the owner of this car (another staff member) quite rightly wants her car fixed and has been on to my wife about it. My wife has asked for the nursing home to review the cctv to see what happened etc.
So what would stw do.
I dont think we can involve insurance as wife has given this bloke permission to drive her car (car is only insured for us both).
Tell nursing home to sort it as it was their employee that did it after other employees blocked her in initially, it was done on private land, etc and while they are at it fix the wifes scrape too (its a banger and really wont benefit from the small scrape being fixed).
Suck it up and pay for the damage as it was the wifes car that caused it and she gave the guy permission to move her car.
Answers on a postcard please.
You are responsible I would say. As the owners of the car that caused the damage (regardless of who was driving unless they had nicked it)
In an ideal world the person who was holding the steering wheel and did the damage would sort it out. But we dont live in one of them and nobody seems to like taking responsibility for their own actions these days so good luck!
Think you’ll have to suck it up - you’re wife gave someone not insured permission to drive it. Did he even have a licence (I’m being pedantic here) - did she check?
Did she get details of the guy in case she’s chased for the damage to the other car?
Be careful, as allowing someone to drive your vehicle without proper insurance is an offence... I think you may have to suck it up, although I would be asking for a contribution from the person who was driving.
I'd get a new wife.
EDIT - of course the other person driving may have third party cover through their own insurance, and they were driving your wife's car with permission. Worth a try?
You may be able to argue that best efforts were made, and due to the other cars being parked illegally, the result was inevitable.
Sounds like it could get messy though. Perhaps the correct course of action would have been to report the illegally parked vehicles to the police as causing an obstruction and asking advice. But, hindsight and all that.
Good luck
memo to self - read the OP properly
New wife is an option. This one is costing me a fortune.
I have a feeling that we will have to suck it up. The guy who moved it works in the nursing home. As it was in their private car park etc i am hoping the home sort it.
I would try option 2 but accept you will probably end up with 3
In a private car park? does that alter the issues around insurance? I'd say the chap who was driving was liable however how much are we talking about - nursing home staff are unlikely to have much spare cash.
I cannot see how its the homes liability.
Ask the nursing home if their insurance covers them operating a valet parking service.
^^ like your thinking zilog.
TJ, its a private carpark for sure, off the road, walled in etc. I have not seen the other car but judging by the small scrap on the wifes car I am thinking bumper respray rather than new bumper/panels etc.
I cannot see how its the homes liability.
I'd say it is in this instance:-
Employees block customer in
Employees can't be reached by their usual method of communication
Another employee, whilst on duty I assume, offers to move the car for the customer from the problem caused by employees.
All on the business's premises
That sounds like the home's problem to me in terms of making good for the op's wife. It does not however mean that they would not attempt to recover the cost from their employees responsible or carry out some sort of disciplinary action however.
Driver liable and either claims on his insurance or its vicarious liability - the care home.
Not your problem which, and getting done for allowing an uninsured to drive your car is a separate thing, and would they prosecute in this case?
Oh and new wife obvs.
I really do not see how this is anything to do with the home unless they told the staff to do this. Infact the staff have clearly disobeyed instructions by parking on the yellow lines so that surely lets the home off the hook
I really do not see how this is anything to do with the home unless they told the staff to do this. Infact the staff have clearly disobeyed instructions by parking on the yellow lines so that surely lets the home off the hook
Because it is their employees.
e.g. a double glazing company installer breaks a vase in a customer's house despite being told specifically not to go into other rooms in houses they work in. In the first instance the customer would expect the company to do the making good. The company might sack the installer or take it out of their wages but from the customer's perspective the replacement/compensation would come from the company. Example chosen through personal experience.
I appreciate the OP's situation is a bit more grey than mine but I think I'd still lean that way all told.
Hmmmm. Just thinking this could escalate into a great who dunnit.
Narked husband takes his chance to see off his MIL blaming Home staff seeking revenge. Or narked employee whos car was damaged sees off elderly resident in act of revenge or guy caught up in doing a good deed seeks revenge on elderly lady for his dismissal . Either way its not looking good for the mother in law.........
The only option with a satisfactory outcome would be to burn the old peoples home down.
The only option with a satisfactory outcome would be to burn the old peoples home down
If it's a private car park you don't need insurance. The bloke who drove the car did it,so is responsible.
If leaving work I hop into some else car in the car park and drive it into someone elses I don't think my employer would agree that they were liable as I was at work. The care home didn't ask him to move the car as part of his job.
The main thing is not to get lawayers envolved. You could argue that person driving should pay for the damage on the other car.
But fixing her car will be cheaper than fighting the dented cars owner lawyers even if you're in the right
The home would only be responsible if they told the staff to do this IMO. As the staff have disobeyed instructions by parking on the yellow lines then how can the home be held responsible for staff doing what they have been told not to do?
Same with the driver - unless he was acting under instructions then surely its nothing to do with the home?
My wife had been in and out to reception a few times trying to get the car owners. I think the employee who came out was probably just passing reception and got asked to see what was up/could he help. Dont think he was instructed per say, more just trying to help.
Therefore never a defence for colliding a parked and unattended vehicle. Some very odd views up there.
According to the Road Traffic Act, insurance is legally required in any public place, and I believe that includes private car parks unless there is a physical barrier to prevent access by the public.
Employers are liable for the action of their staff when the staff are doing the job they're employed for, or possibly another activity closely connected, but not if the action is unconnected with the job.
ive always wondered why we insist on colour coding bumpers - they are useless as bumpers once you do that 😀
unless he was acting under instructions
He was acting under instruction - his own instruction. Whilst acting as a representative of his employer whilst dealing with a customer. In my example above would you say the window company was responsible for the vase despite the guy doing something he was specifically told not to do?
edit - Andy's last post seals it for me - he was asked to go help.
Presumably it's only a small scrape otherwise your wife would have been aware it had happened at the time.
Just pay the small amount to have it sorted for them.
I'd bet it will be more hassle than it's worth to try and involve insurance or the nursing home.
He did so and off my wife went. Wife then gets a call to say her car has scraped the car next to her and in doing so scrapped the car next to her, on inspecting her car there is a scrape on the rear wheel arch so looks like it has hit the car.
Devil's advocate but, what's the chance it was scraped on the way in and they're now pinning it on your wife?
1) I don't know about you but I sure as hell couldn't tell you which car I was parked next to in a car park unless I had very good reason to know, like if I'd bumped it.
2)If I didn't think it possible to get the car out without damage I'd have been paying a [b] lot[/b] of attention when it was moved, either because I'm interested or paranoid but, as an observer outside of the car I'm pretty sure I'd have noticed contact enough to damage both cars.
On that basis I'd be asking a few questions along the lines of "prove it wasn't you" before I worried if it were mine, the random staffer or the care home's liability.
Assuming your wife knows the damage was caused by the driver of her car she wouldn't have got into the car and driven home without leaving some sort of note taking or apportioning blame I assume?
But realistically if you think the authorised driver of your wife's car is to blame whoever authorised them bites the bullet imo. I'd be getting a quote and putting my hand in my pocket.
Pay to fix both cars.
As has already been stated, the Home are vicariously liable for the actions of their employees whilst at work or any other situation facilitated by the Home (works Xmas parties are notorious for claims against employees either from Colleagues or venues alike).
Assuming the Home is adequately insured their Public Liability should include Vehicle Movement cover (whether authorised or not) for just such a circumstance.
The OP’s wife had no control over the situation and was not even in the vehicle at the time therefore liability should not attach to her.
If it’s a private car park you don’t need insurance.
The law is for a road or other public place (RTA:s143(1a)). It sounds like the car park is open to members of the public either walking or driving to visit the home - therefore it is a public place.
The bloke who drove the car did it,so is responsible.
Assuming that it was him who did it then I can see your logic. However I'm surprised she didn't notice it happen at the time. Either way if he needed to be insured then by handing him the keys knowing he was not insured she's also broken the law (RTA:s143(1b)) - even if he didn't cause the accident.
By far the simplest solution is to pay for Chips Away to pop round the home and fix the other car. If it was more serious than they deal with surely it would have been noticed by the driver at the time. This will cost less than an insurance excess, or a fixed penalty for s143.
Infact the staff have clearly disobeyed instructions by parking on the yellow lines so that surely lets the home off the hook
TJ - I agree that any suggestion of vicarious liability is weak. However if you were going down that line then I'd suggest if the management know that cars are being left on double yellows and do nothing about it then perhaps they are part of the cause. If my MIL was in a home, I wouldn't be picking fights with the owners/staff over something like this.
If there is no CCTV evidence, tell the owner of the other car to get it fixed themselves and park more considerately next time. Obviously be careful incase they record the phone call as proof of liability.
What has the chap who moved the car said? Sounds like Bombers are in order...
What exactly was your wife doing when the car was being moved? Surely she'd have noticed a bump? If she didn't notice and the driver didn't notice then perhaps someone is pulling a fast one? Prepare for the whiplash claim to follow...
If there is no CCTV evidence, tell the owner of the other car to get it fixed themselves and park more considerately next time.
it doesn't state that the damaged car was one of those parked insconsiderately
Was the damaged car the same one as when your wife tried to move? Has the car next to your wifes one changed and damaged yours on the way in to the space?
Point of note, I'm assuming this is in Scotland, do the laws differ at all there?
Wife then gets a call to say her car has scraped the car next to her and in doing so scrapped the car next to her
Is this just a typo or are there three cars involved?
Either way if he needed to be insured then by handing him the keys knowing he was not insured she’s also broken the law
How would she know whether he was insured or not? Do we even know that for sure now?
'UPDATE'.....
Thankyou for all you replies.
so its new wife/patio time.
I went up to the home to have a look at the CCTV for myself and see what went on.
Wifes car was blocked right enough by 2 cars opposite on double yellows. Wife tries to get her car out. Goes back and forward many a time. Gets in a right pickle. Employee jumps in and reverses her car back (away from car next to her) so no way he could of done it. So from what i saw my wife is banged to rights and HAS caused the bumper scrape. Now due to the angle of the cctv i am not 100% but i am happy enough that she did (95%). I then had the joy of telling her this as delicately as i could....and somehow it is all my fault now! FFS. Called owner of other car and getting things sorted for her now.
I think you need to post up the video. Good lad
This being STW, I can't believe no-one's suggested extra driver training yet...
Is the damage consistent with how she tried to get out of the space?
The home would only be responsible if they told the staff to do this IMO
Vicarious liability can be very broad and employer instructions are definitely not required for it to exist. Eg it can cover acts on staff nights out etc. 2nd para in wiki:
An employer may be held liable under principles of vicarious liability if an employee does an authorized act in an unauthorized way
poly I'd be interested to hear why you think VL is weak here, if you are still talking to me.
Its not an authorised act?
Doesn't need to be. I didn't have time to look for a source.
From another thread. Is assault is an authorized act?
poly I’d be interested to hear why you think VL is weak here, if you are still talking to me.
Al sorry this thread dropped off my radar. I wasn't ignoring you! Presumably the employee had no specific job responsibility for the car park. Its not clear that the employee was given any instruction (by someone who held authority) to sort the "problem" or if it was on their own initiative. There needs to be a chain from the field of activities of the employee to the event. That may exist, or it may not. It might work, but its definitely not a shoe in.
How would she know whether he was insured or not? Do we even know that for sure now?
Cougar - its a strict liability offence - it doesn't matter if she knew or now. If she permits someone to drive who is not actually insured she commits the offence. There can be special reasons for mitigation which would not see the usual 6 pts added to her license if she can show a reasonably held genuine belief that he was insured. If she hasn't even asked then it would be very unlikely to succeed.
All irrelevant since the wife was to blame.