Clonked a car with the carriage :(

P

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
Sam went out in the carriage yesterday, and was completely unphased by the huge harvesters / tractor-trailers pulling the turnips on the estate. He was faultless, standing quietly whilst 40 tonnes of agricultural equipment went past him inches away.

Then, in the middle of a village (a tight spot) he took a start at a pile of twigs just inside a gate; just a single quick step sideways, but enough to take us into the side of a car. Nobody hurt, but the car has a nasty scratch. Haven't checked the carriage yet.

I wouldn't mind but he's the kind you can ride quietly anywhere. Barring recent work on his puddle-problem (and even that's now fixed), I can't remember the last time he looked twice at anything.

Whilst I'm not at fault, neither are they, so it seems reasonable to make a 'without prejudice' contribution toward their excess (or repair costs if less), or alternatively to direct them to the BDS insurance, but that has a high excess, and even if it pays out (would it?) they would still have to claim via their own insurance and pay the excess - which I wouldn't help with, as I'd have to pay the £500 BDS excess :(

On the assumption I'm not the first carriage driver / rider to face this little, ahem, difficulty... what are your experiences?
 
Sadly I think you are at fault in the legal liability side of things. By the sound of things the driver didn't do a single thing wrong, your pony hit them so if you'd been in a car there would be no question that you were liable and that your insurance would be claimed on, not theirs. Their excess would be refunded to them once your insurance company accepted the claim and you would have to pay yours.

On a slightly more cheerful note! Ask them to get a quote or two for repair before either of you contact your insurers, hopefully the cost will be way lower than £500, you pay that and they don't have to declare a claim as no fault or otherwise it will affect their premiums for a few years.
 
Then, in the middle of a village (a tight spot) he took a start at a pile of twigs just inside a gate; just a single quick step sideways, but enough to take us into the side of a car. Nobody hurt, but the car has a nasty scratch. Haven't checked the carriage

Whilst I'm not at fault, neither are they, so it seems reasonable to make a 'without prejudice' contribution toward their excess (or repair costs if less), or alternatively to direct them to the BDS insurance, but that has a high excess, and even if it pays out (would it?) they would still have to claim via their own insurance and pay the excess - which I wouldn't help with, as I'd have to pay the £500 BDS excess :(

so you are not at fault??? They will make a claim and it will go against your insurance. Why on earth should they be out of pocket for this?
 
Personally I think you should pay for the whole of the damage of the claim as they did (by the sounds of it) nothing wrong.

Sorry but if someone hit my car with a carriage and left a nasty scratch I'd have steam coming from both ears if they suggested I paid for it myself. If I'd done nothing wrong that is.
 
pennyturner said:
Sam went out in the carriage yesterday, and was completely unphased by the huge harvesters / tractor-trailers pulling the turnips on the estate. He was faultless, standing quietly whilst 40 tonnes of agricultural equipment went past him inches away.

Then, in the middle of a village (a tight spot) he took a start at a pile of twigs just inside a gate; just a single quick step sideways, but enough to take us into the side of a car. Nobody hurt, but the car has a nasty scratch. Haven't checked the carriage yet.

I wouldn't mind but he's the kind you can ride quietly anywhere. Barring recent work on his puddle-problem (and even that's now fixed), I can't remember the last time he looked twice at anything.

Whilst I'm not at fault, neither are they, so it seems reasonable to make a 'without prejudice' contribution toward their excess (or repair costs if less), or alternatively to direct them to the BDS insurance, but that has a high excess, and even if it pays out (would it?) they would still have to claim via their own insurance and pay the excess - which I wouldn't help with, as I'd have to pay the £500 BDS excess :(

On the assumption I'm not the first carriage driver / rider to face this little, ahem, difficulty... what are your experiences?
Click to expand...

We nearly had the same thing yesterday, while going round a quiet private road, three children came running across the green towards my pony, who spooked sideways and tried to turn to face them almost jack knifing the carriage. The passenger was a bit delayed jumping off, but in the end did and held the pony and told the children not to run towards her. We got away but the wheels were about 6 inches from the car.
 
Last edited:
Many years ago (over 30) I damaged a car with my trap. I used the insurance through my BHS membership and they dealt with the car owners insurance. sorted it all out for me, and I didn't pay anything.
 
Last edited:
I am afraid OP under the law it was your carriage that hit the other persons car (you have admitted that) because your horse spooked at something,a horse you were in control of .
How are you not responsible for their repairs to their car?

You will quickly find its not your insurance provider who will be contacted it will be you personally.
I personally think you show a total lack of ability to take responsibility it is not only their excess but also their driving claim record that effects them and all you offer is a token towards their excess . I think you will find their insurance company wont be very sympathetic to your attitude,and quite rightly so . Put the boot on the other foot and how would you feel?
 
Last edited:
There is no way round this. You're responsible for the horse, even when they spook and cause accidental damage. I hope you're insured OP as you will be the one footing the bill.
 
Thanks everyone for comments. I should clarify... both vehicles were being driven at the time - not a parked car. If both were cars, insurers would take a 'knock for knock' approach, but standard practice regarding car insurance doesn't necessarily apply, hence I doubt the BDS insurer would pay without contesting liability... the worst outcome here is a claim on both insurances with a legal wrangle in the middle, with costs far exceeding the damage done.
As others have said, I'm hoping with reasonable quotes it can just be fixed without going through (either) insurance at all - after all, it's not much more than a parking ding. Certainly if it were my vehicle, that's what I'd do, but it's not mine, so if they choose to go with an 'insurance approved' garage at 10x the proper cost, there's nothing I can do.

I agree that I'd be unhappy if it were my car, but I can't undo what is done, and couldn't have done anything different anyhow. It's not like same horse hasn't been past same gate many times.
 
We had this happen, car was parked though so def our fault, claim went through our normal horse insurance and all went through fine.
 
Your horse went into their car. If your car went into their car, your insurance would be the one paying out. There is no difference in the circumstance of who went into who.

Is your horse or yourself insured??
 
blitznbobs said:
Just out of interest - why do you think you are not at fault??
Click to expand...

OK, so I might be wrong here, but it would be very difficult to see any action or omission on my part which caused the incident - other than simply being there... unless 'strict liability' applies. I think insurer's lawyers would have a field day on both sides.
 
Sorry but the horse spooked, therefore in eyes of law you didn't have full control and you are at fault. It is not knock for knock. Ask if she will go without insurance if you pay for the whole thing but be prepared for her to say no. Perticularly given your attitude so far

Btw having had a few prangs in my car, some went through insurance (not my fault) some didn't (like when I backed into the wall of my house) the insurance guys do a far superior job at only a slightly higher cost. Same repair non insurance was £95 and through insurance was £105 so not a mega difference in price but there was a mega difference in quality.
 
Last edited:
How did you come to be so close to the car in the first place? If they were over taking you and not leaving room, I could see how you might think it wasn't your fault however if you hit an on coming car which was on their side of the road because your "car" swerved then I'm afraid I don't see any question of liability, of course it's your fault.
 
pennyturner said:
OK, so I might be wrong here, but it would be very difficult to see any action or omission on my part which caused the incident - other than simply being there... unless 'strict liability' applies. I think insurer's lawyers would have a field day on both sides.
Click to expand...
Its is not about whether you did anything wrong its about how their car got damaged .
You said yourself that your vehicle went sideways and hit the other car so it was your vehicle hitting the car that caused the damage hence you a responsible for the repair cost, best let the other driver have your insurance details and let them put in the claim but you need to inform your insurers as well. It would be illegal not to pass on your details to them.
 
Last edited:
pennyturner said:
OK, so I might be wrong here, but it would be very difficult to see any action or omission on my part which caused the incident - other than simply being there... unless 'strict liability' applies. I think insurer's lawyers would have a field day on both sides.
Click to expand...

Your omission was to have full control of your animal ... It's your fault.
 
FfionWinnie said:
How did you come to be so close to the car in the first place?
Click to expand...

Village in question is very narrow, with parked cars allowing only 7 or 8 feet for traffic. They had just cleared the parked cars so perhaps not quite right into the side. TBH everyone was driving well, and it was sheer bad luck that they were that close in a tight spot.
 
popsdosh said:
Its is not about whether you did anything wrong its about how their car got damaged .
You said yourself that your vehicle went sideways and hit the other car so it was your vehicle hitting the car that caused the damage hence you a responsible for the repair cost, best let the other driver have your insurance details and let them put in the claim but you need to inform your insurers as well. It would be illegal not to pass on your details to them.
Click to expand...

I have of course given them my details (although the illegal bit only applies to motor vehicles). They haven't given their insurers details to me... which would be illegal I were driving a car, but perhaps not in this case.

I think the rules are different... more like your dog being hit by a car.
 
I am another that while as horse people we know youbdidntbaxtually do anything wrong, it was just horses being horses. However your cart hit their car so unless you are saying they should have given you much more room(not sure that would be a defence or not). Then it's your fault
 
Sadly I agree with the others that its your fault as they were overtaking normally and you swerved in to them, their car would not be damaged had they passed you and the spook hadn't happened, they didn't have enough room to take evasive action. The buck has to stop with someone and as the person in control of the pony sadly that is you

Think of it reversed - if the car had swerved in to you would you be sharing the costs?

Its a real shame but it seems pretty straightforward

They would lose their no.claims bonus (if they have one) over this so hopefully they will agree to a non insurance route but don't be surprised if the full amount is expected of you

If you want to fight this I think you are going to have to try and prove that it was unsafe for them to overtake at that particular spot
 
Last edited:
I would clearly it is your 'fault ' your trap deviated into the car not the other way round .
I don't think it would be a knock for knock case at all.
 
I was just wondering why, if the road was so narrow, the vehicles were passing each other there anyway rather than one waiting at the end of the narrow stretch until they could pass somewhere wider. If it was a large vehicle then this would have had to happen so really nobody was allowing enough room.
 
Gloi said:
I was just wondering why, if the road was so narrow, the vehicles were passing each other there anyway rather than one waiting at the end of the narrow stretch until they could pass somewhere wider. If it was a large vehicle then this would have had to happen so really nobody was allowing enough room.
Click to expand...

That's really for the insurance companies to sort out if I where the driver of the car I would be saying to my insurance company the pony and carriage swerved into me and it not my fault the pony spooked .
 
For obvious reasons, I don't want to second guess liability.
Thinking about it, the pony stopped in a 'whassat' kind of way. As we connected, the shafts and forecarriage were pointing slightly away from the car, such that I was able to ask him to take a step forward to get clear. It was the driver's foot-plate which was in contact. It would be a stretch to describe him as 'out of control'. More like 'momentarily distracted'.

In car accidents, unless it's a rear-end shunt insurers often agree to split the claim - but I think this is an industry agreement to reduce legal fees, and push both partie's premiums up.
 
pennyturner said:
For obvious reasons, I don't want to second guess liability.
Thinking about it, the pony stopped in a 'whassat' kind of way. As we connected, the shafts and forecarriage were pointing slightly away from the car, such that I was able to ask him to take a step forward to get clear. It was the driver's foot-plate which was in contact. It would be a stretch to describe him as 'out of control'. More like 'momentarily distracted'.

In car accidents, unless it's a rear-end shunt insurers often agree to split the claim - but I think this is an industry agreement to reduce legal fees, and push both partie's premiums up.
Click to expand...

I think your optimistic , cars don't swerve on their own ponies do.
 
It's your fault, if your carriage hadn't have swerved then the car wouldn't have been scratched... Regardless of how close the car was....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top