Responsibility for damage caused by out of control horse

Gloi said:
Years ago I damaged a parked car with my pony and trap. Pony spooked into it. My BHS insurance paid out for it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, done the exactly same, horse spooked at someone’s poodle running across the road, just enough to take off a wing mirror (upon which, we nearly took off, too!), it was my fault, because I was the driver and owner of the animal and vehicle combo which caused the damage. End of.
 
SEL said:
I suspect the insurance company are not sorting it out hence OP going to small claims court.

They'll just pay for the repair and hit OP's no claims record
Click to expand...
Most people have a protected NCB these days. The whole point of haveing insurance is that you don't need to go chasing all.over the place to find out who owns what. It is quite possible that the horse in question has nothing to do with the RS nearby and that is why the RS has ignored the communication.
 
Last edited:
IrishMilo said:
Lord forbid someone tries to do a nice thing for a horse rider on the road! Jeez. Way to enforce the stereotype...

How would stopping a vehicle put stress on a horse?
Click to expand...
Without more info we don't know, but I can definitely see a possibility of an already nervous horse being pulled over to allow the scary object to pass, dancing around, and then (in the horse's mind) the scary object coming to a rest alongside it, scaring it further and effectively trapping it. I am sure that in future the OP will give horses a wide berth and pass slowly without stopping/trapping the horse.
 
Red-1 said:
I know someone who used to work at small claims court and they said that if you get the paperwork (free) and fill it, then send a copy to the other party, informing them that this is action towards taking them to court, then 90% of people who know they are at fault will pay up. That way you never do have to pay to register the case. This is what I'm intending to to with British Airways / Dial a Flight atm!
Click to expand...
Sending the forms completed but not filed could be seen as an offence for falsifying legal documents. Please don't do this. I also imagine the legal department at BA will know this.
 
Red-1 said:
I would dare say that it did contribute to what happened, but I don't think that a non horse aware driver would be expected to know that, nor do I think that it should mean the driver is at fault. That would be as long as the driver didn't stop close to the horse, as in within 2m. Even then, if the vehicle was stationary at the time, I would say the horse/rider was at fault.

I makes me fed up when people don't take responsibility for their accidents. The horse was in training, the car had stopped and the horse reversed round and kicked the car, causing serious damage. The fault doesn't sound like it is the driver's!

I do hope the driver had a dash cam!

I would take the equestrian centre (as employer) and the rider (as person in charge of the horse at the time) to court, having first written, via recorded delivery, a letter requesting owner details. I would detail the fact that owner details have not been supplied to the court. Normally for an RTC, if details are not given, the Police will visit the other party and get details for you, but this is not an RTC by definition so they probably won't.

I know someone who used to work at small claims court and they said that if you get the paperwork (free) and fill it, then send a copy to the other party, informing them that this is action towards taking them to court, then 90% of people who know they are at fault will pay up. That way you never do have to pay to register the case. This is what I'm intending to to with British Airways / Dial a Flight atm!
Click to expand...

Red-1 said:
I tried to take a livery yard owner to Small Claims for non payment of my deposit when I left a yard. I submitted the paperwork to the court and the other person in the case can then submit their response to this. The yard owner's response included multiple lies against me as a defense for not repaying the deposit. We went to mediation - I can't remember if we had to do this- and she continued to tell lies to the mediator. In the end I settled for half of what I owed because I thought she would also have been happy to lie in front of a judge. People have this belief that the small claims process is easy but it isn't.
Click to expand...
 
Pearlsasinger said:
Most people have a protected NCB these days. The whole point of haveing insurance is that you don't need to go chasing all.over the place to find out who owns what. It is quite possible that the horse in question has nothing to do with the RS nearby and that is why the RS has ignored the communication.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the protected no claims discount is a % discount on what the policy would have been. Having a claim can still put the overall cost of the insurance policy up, it's just that you'd still have a 40% discount (or whatever your discount is) on that.

Also, they are not protected against numerous claims. OP may already have a claim that has been protected, and can't afford for another.

I would still personally be trying to sort the matter out.
HopOnTrot said:
Sending the forms completed but not filed could be seen as an offence for falsifying legal documents. Please don't do this. I also imagine the legal department at BA will know this.
Click to expand...
I believe it would only be falsifying documents of you sent them under the impression that they were filed. I don't believe it is an offence to send copies with a covering letter saying that you are preparing to file and this is what you will be filing, as a 'before action' communication.

It was a local court employee who actually recommended this as a course of action, as then companies can see that you are indeed taking steps as opposed to just saying that you are going to small claims. She said that most companies simply pay out as then they won't be hit with the court fees if they then either don't turn up to defend or if they lose.
 
In terms of who has insurance to cover this? The Equestrian centre. It would have been their horse (or on loan to them) and their rider, hence their insurance would cover this.
 
maya2008 said:
In terms of who has insurance to cover this? The Equestrian centre. It would have been their horse (or on loan to them) and their rider, hence their insurance would cover this.
Click to expand...
If, indeed, that is where the horse came from. A horse on the road outside/nearby a RS isn't necessarily from there.

As for increased insurance costs, involvement if any kind in an accident can lead to that. The accident doesn't have to have been your fault for the insurance to cost you more post accident, nomattet who pays.
 
Pearlsasinger said:
If, indeed, that is where the horse came from. A horse on the road outside/nearby a RS isn't necessarily from there.

As for increased insurance costs, involvement if any kind in an accident can lead to that. The accident doesn't have to have been your fault for the insurance to cost you more post accident, nomattet who pays.
Click to expand...
That is true, but you can mitigate.

Sadly, Mr Red was driving my horsebox very early one morning, on the way to BD regionals. The day had got off to a bad start with a power cut and plaiting by torch had not been easy. He got caught on a corner on the country lanes and clipped a car's front wing with our rear. It was only about 5mph on the 90 degree bend but there was damage. Normally, he would have stopped altogether.

TBH, had the other car not stopped right on the apex of the bend, both vehicles would have fitted.

Mr Red chose to pay for the damage directly as he had caused it. We informed my insurance that this is what he had done. We still expected an increase in all of our insurances, 2 cars and the horsebox, as he was named on all and he'd had an at-fault accident. Nope, they all said that because he'd paid himself and also admitted it to all insurance companies, they didn't see him as an extra risk. He had not claimed.

That is why I would pursue it myself.
 
Red-1 said:
I believe it would only be falsifying documents of you sent them under the impression that they were filed. I don't believe it is an offence to send copies with a covering letter saying that you are preparing to file and this is what you will be filing, as a 'before action' communication.

It was a local court employee who actually recommended this as a course of action, as then companies can see that you are indeed taking steps as opposed to just saying that you are going to small claims. She said that most companies simply pay out as then they won't be hit with the court fees if they then either don't turn up to defend or if they lose.
Click to expand...
Small claims are done online, you don’t need to print anything but best practice is to send a 7 day letter before you start action, printing off the filled but not filed forms would serve no purpose other than to make the debtor assume you had already filed them, which could land you in hot water. I’ve done a fair amount of training around this as I used to work in debt recovery.
 
Agree with this, Small Claims is not at all easy! My husband (Lawyer retired) is helping a friend with a Small Claims track and quite frankly it is a nightmare not least because the Claimant against my friend is a very nasty complete nutter!
 
onemoretime said:
Agree with this, Small Claims is not at all easy! My husband (Lawyer retired) is helping a friend with a Small Claims track and quite frankly it is a nightmare not least because the Claimant against my friend is a very nasty complete nutter!
Click to expand...
And then even if they find in your favour you are basically relying on the other person to pay it without any fuss
 
fredflop said:
Crux of the matter is having either dashcam footage or an independent witness.

Proving anything otherwise will be tough
Click to expand...
This sums the situation up completely. Evidence is key.

Years ago my car was written off whilst parked at the end of the cul de sac where I live. I was lay on the sofa watching the racing and heard an almighty bang. Shot outside to see a builders merchants lorry trying to turn around and he had hit my car on the door pillar between front and rear doors, the car was left looking like someone had tried to fold it in half. Driver admitted what he had done, he was a alone in the cab. I took his name, details company, pictures etc and passed the lot to my insurer the NFU. I thought it would be straight forward as the driver had admitted the incident, there was even black paint off my car on his truck. Photo taken.

The companies insurer told the NFU that the driver did not admit anything to me and as there was only the driver and me present there was no evidence of what happened because I was in the house at the point of the impact, they claimed anything could have happened to my car, there was no evidence that the damage was caused by the lorry. Now remember, my car was parked and empty at the time of the incident. It went through the courts and the NFU lost, I got write off money for my car, lost my NCB and had to buy another car. Cost me a fortune monetary and stress wise.
 
I used to do car claims for a large insurer.

What evidence do you have? Dash cam? Witness? Local CCTV?

If your insurer isn’t pursuing it then it’s likely that it’s because they won’t win. If it’s a good/big insurer they have internal legal teams who if there is (for us it was 50% or greater) a good chance of winning will pursue the case, as it’s not a huge job, if the claims handlers can’t get it agreed for what ever reason.

If you’ve logged it with them you may as well let them deal with the damage, and the case as it will affect your premiums anyway.

Go back to the accident scene and look around for cameras, doorcams etc just in case. Without footage or them agreeing liability, I honestly think any liability is likely to be 50:50. If there is any chance that you weren’t 2m away then I actually wouldn’t kick the hornets nest too hard. Not saying OP wasn’t but I’ve seen many a split liability driver talk themselves into a full fault claim by getting insistent that it’s non-fault and getting it looked at closer. 😅😅

If it’s a riding school maybe worth ringing the council and asking them if they have the insurers details. They probably won’t share them with you but would your insurance company. If you can ring and confirm the council has the details they may try get them.
 
Many years ago I had something similar happen, in a town, I was waiting to go down a right turn. The driver of the car sent solicitors letters and car bill to me. I went to a local solicitor for advice and his receptionist had seen the incident and said that the car had actually been creeping forward and hit the horse, who kicked out. If I had not been in a town there would not have been any witnesses.
 
Red-1 said:
I would also say that the rider saying that the horse was in training may be seen as some admission of liability.

A riding school has to be licenced by the local council. If they won't respond having damaged your vehicle, I think I would contact the council licencing office to make sure they are running a legal outfit, which would include insurance.
Click to expand...
A learner driver has L plates on but its not an admission of liability in the event of a collision.I would think that "in training" should be taken as L plates would for a driver , and other road users should give a little more space and time .
 
HopOnTrot said:
Why hasn’t the insurance company repaired it as an “at fault” claim instead if no reply from 3rd party?
Click to expand...
I agree, Insurance companies usually fix their own insureds car and then figure out who is reponsible and claim it back, if its deemed to be the other party at fault. I have in the past had to pay my excess when collecting my repaired car , which has then been returned when liability was admitted by the other party.
 
anglo said:
I agree, Insurance companies usually fix their own insureds car and then figure out who is reponsible and claim it back, if its deemed to be the other party at fault. I have in the past had to pay my excess when collecting my repaired car , which has then been returned when liability was admitted by the other party.
Click to expand...

Perhaps OP is hoping to have the riding school cough up without going through his insurance, which, if that is the case is highly unlikely to happen.
 
A few years back a friend had an accident turning into her own driveway. It's a national speed limit country lane. She indicated left and swung out to get the turn into her drive way (she does do this quite fast) as she turned she noticed a car coming up on her near/passenger side. The car's collided and damage was done. I have no idea why the second car thought they could under/over take when some was indicating to turn, but it happened. Insurance was informed and the following car was confirmed to be at fault. Cars were both repaired and everyone moved on with life. About a year later the son on the driver of the second car put in a claim against my friend for damages to his car. The legal debt of friends insurance company dealt with it all court 'stuff' and instructed a solicitor to act on her behalf. It was all thrown out in the end, but the son didn't agree withe the decision of the insurance company to put his mother at fault.

So OP could be unhappy with the insurance decision not to pursue a claim if they can't prove fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top