What would you do in this situation?

Tbh.....in an ideal shiny world you could perhaps argue that the rider was in the wrong, even though it was really an unfortunate accident...

However, to tell the total truth, if it was me and I wasn't convinced it was my fault, and hadn't given him any of my details, I wouldn't be giving it another thought.

Not clear cut enough to just pay up IMO, I'd just move on and put it down to experience.

Just being honest!
 
EmsHooper said:
She is indeed liable for the damage done. Shame she didn't at least have liability insurance with the BHS, if nothing else. As it stands, she is due to repair the damage done to the car by her horse.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this. I believe owners of animals are strictly liable for any third party damage. It may well be worth the owner checking their household insurance policy as they may be covered on that, the BHS would only make a payment if you weren't covered on that anyway.
I really think that everyone should have 3rd party insurance though, even horses stood in a field can stray and cause damage, never mind those on a public highway.
 
If the horse bumped the car, then the rider is liable. Surely if the horse knocked into the car, you would have heard something though? Unfortunately does sound as if this guy is a bit of a bully though however, I don't think the girl has a leg to stand on it being her word against his and the fact that the horse has no third party liability is very poor indeed. Personally think any horse that is taken on the road should have third party liability!
 
God, I would feel awful and would stump up straight away if my horse jumped into someone's car. If I wobbled my bike into someone's car that would be my fault and even though BH has a mind of his own I view them as about the same. After all, he's my responsibility at the end of the day. But then I am old fashioned and don't claim for 'whiplash' when rear ended etc so I'm probably all alone in thinking that.

I do have public liability but for the sake of £400 I'd probably just pay it out of my own pocket tbh.
 
Without being a first party witness, there's no way of anybody knowing if he was driving too close. Even for the rider I'm guessing it happened so quick. I think if it was me and I assume he was a bit close, then I would be offering to pay half of the bill. If he was overtaking with due care, then I'd be paying all of it. Insurance or not.
 
I'd say it depends on how close the car was & how far the horse went sideways. If the driver had left a car width between, & the horse jumped far enough to hit it, then the rider should pay. If however the driver was closer than a cars width, then its the drivers fault imo.
And I'm so glad I don't have samuelismo for a neighbour!
 
Most insurance companies will not pay out for this sort of 'accident' unless the rider admits negligence.

In this case you were not negligent, it was, as insurance companies state 'an act of God'

The driver was at fault for not passing wide.
 
Wagtail said:
Is the horse covered third party? If not, driver should claim on his insurance. I hope you didn't admit responsibilty.
Click to expand...

Im actually not sure, I have to say I think OP as rider should be responsible and pay, she was technically in charge of the horse and should have had insurance as a rider, without this insurance she should pay for the damage if the horse isn't covered. Although I have to say that I insist that anyone that rides my horses insure themselves so that my horse and them are covered whilst they ride.
 
Sugar_and_Spice said:
Refuse to pay. There's no legal obligation to insure a horse, not even for public liability. Don't know what the current highway code says, it used to say pass a cars width away. With a two lane road he would have had room to do that by using the other lane, even on a single track road with those rules it means drivers wait until there's a safe place to pass, not squeeze past because they don't want to wait. Your horse didn't cross the white line therefore driver clearly didn't leave enough room when overtaking so the collision was his fault. Even if the rules have changed and its somehow your fault, you can let him take you to court if you prefer, then let him get another court order to obtain payment if he wins. I'm not a callous person who believes in ripping people off, but I really don't think the collision was your fault. Horses are unpredictable and drivers need to take more care. Just because the person in front is going frustratingly slow doesn't mean someone has a right to overtake.
Click to expand...


No, there is no legal obligation to insure a horse, but to pay for damage there is, insured or not, the 'victim' could quite rightly take this to the small claims court and the rider would be culpable
 
From experience of a similar even where a friend of mine had a horse spook into a car I'm afraid I think it's going to be the rider's responsibility to pay for the damage. Regardless of insurance or not. She should count herself lucky that the driver isn't after more than £400 because if it went through insurance etc it probably would be more.

I honestly think it's utter insanity to ride any horse on a public road without insurance.
 
Honey08 said:
Best thing to do.




:eek::eek::eek:
So YOU regularly bump other cars, causing damage (which you think is not worth bothering about as its just a dent or scratch!!) and YOU'RE getting on YOUR high horse about them wanting to claim!!!
:eek::eek::eek:
I'm actually lost for words for once (just glad I don't live near you!).
Click to expand...

bikerchickone said:
From experience of a similar even where a friend of mine had a horse spook into a car I'm afraid I think it's going to be the rider's responsibility to pay for the damage. Regardless of insurance or not. She should count herself lucky that the driver isn't after more than £400 because if it went through insurance etc it probably would be more.

I honestly think it's utter insanity to ride any horse on a public road without insurance.
Click to expand...


Yes and she and the horses owner should both think themselves lucky that the horse isn't injured and in need of veterinary attention because she obviously doesn't see herself as responsible and if the owner does have insurance im sure they would not pay out for injuries acquired whist in the charge of anothe rider/handler
 
Foxhunter49 said:
The driver was at fault for not passing wide.
Click to expand...

Re-reading the original post and in light of another comment on this thread it sounds like the white line referred to is the one down the centre of the road

The driver being the other side of this should be plenty wide enough surely

If the car had been the one to swerve and hit the horse all hell would break loose across the forums starting counless posts about reckless drivers, I dont see why anyone would be reluctant to take responsibility for the fact that their horse was out of control on a road (albeit momentarily) and caused damage
 
Samuelissimo said:
Oh, I get this c**p all the time - I live in London. You are parking and reverse into someone's license plate holder, causing small dent scratch, or bump someone's wing mirror because they were parked in a traffic lane, causing slight but hardly worth bothering about damage. They demand that you pay - to them, direct, some amount or other.
Refuse!! Make them claim on their insurance, which they don't want to do, because, guess what, they will lose their no claims bonus.
Doesn't matter if its horse-caused or otherwise, let him use the insurance system to sort out; also doesn't matter if you are not insured. DO NOT LET PEOPLE BULLY YOU INTO PAYING THEM DIRECTLY!!
If insurance company were to get involved (trust me, I've been there) they would probably find liability on both sides. They hardly ever find that damage is caused by one party only. And if they realised that the other party was an uninsured kid on an uninsured horse, they might pay the driver for his damage, but would then increase his premiums substantially. They wouldn't bother to chase kid/horse.
Click to expand...

crap??? how is it crap, a horse jumped into the mans car and broke the paint. will cost a fair bit for a respray. why should he be the one out of pocket by having to claim on his insurance and face the prospect of increased premium. If the rider had insurance then it wouldn't have been an issue. How about young people being taught to take responsibility for their actions and not encouraged to try and get away with it.
I agree with someone else who said about the horse not being in control enough to stand and wait in a layby. what if they had come to a junction, how could they wait for cars to pass. not safe imho.
 
The girl who was riding the horse should make sure that the incident is reported to the police. The driver is also obliged to inform the police, if I remember rightly it is an offence not to.
 
Actually the post says the horse didn't cross the white line. Also, that the road was narrow. Therefore if the car had been overtaking correctly, i.e leaving a cars width between it & the horse, the car would have been on the far side of the white line. Thus car was actually too close.
 
I agree with samuelissimo that drivers should go through their insurance if they want payment for an accident. People are supposed to inform their insurance if there is an accident, whether or not they intend to claim either on their own insurance or against the other person. When drivers ask for direct compensation without going through the insurance, its because they don't intend to tell the insurance company about the accident. I think that's fraud.

Having had non-fault accidents, yes it sucks to have my premium increased even though it wasn't my fault and didn't affect my no claims bonus. I've had people offer to pay for damage outside of insurance, but I'd never ask for that if it wasn't offered and I certainly wouldn't get cross and demand a direct payment. That is the part that's out of order, both in samuelissimo's experiences and the OP's example.

If the driver in OP's example really thinks he has a case, then he can go through insurance. If the rider doesn't want to risk a court case that they may lose, then they may wish to pay for the repair outside insurance. If I was that rider, believing I wasn't at fault, I'd let the driver chase me through the official channels. No way would I hand over 400 pounds to some random stranger just because they think I should.
 
To me it all depends on how close the car passed, how far the horse spooked, how fast the car was going and how wide the road was, without this it's pointless speculating. I've worked in the insurance industry for over 10 yrs and really nothing surprises me any more, people really only tend to share the info of what sheds them in the best light!

Only personal experience i've had of a horse hitting a car was when a dog spooked a friends horse - on that occassion the BHS insurance was used, they tracked down the dog owner and the dog owner was liable for the damage to the car (personally if it'd been my horse I wouldn't have had it on the road but that's another story :()

... makes those that say the rider is liable in this case think though doen't it?
 
CBFan said:
Given that the horse you were riding jumped sideways and hit the passing car, at a time when the driver of the passing car thought it was safe to do so (given that you'd stopped) I would imagine liability lies with you.

Do you not have rider insurance? If you frequently ride other peoples horses, you really should - it's only about £60 a year and it would cover you for things like this as well as injury to you and the horse.
Click to expand...

i really like this answer.. The lady s horse bounced out of the side of the road and damaged someones pride and joy. If it was my car I would expect some degree of an apology and an offer to repair the damage. If it was my horse I would feel morally bound to ensure the driver was left with the same vehicle he had before my horse trashed it.
There again who has morals these days?
 
luckyoldme said:
i really like this answer.. The lady s horse bounced out of the side of the road and damaged someones pride and joy. If it was my car I would expect some degree of an apology and an offer to repair the damage. If it was my horse I would feel morally bound to ensure the driver was left with the same vehicle he had before my horse trashed it.
There again who has morals these days?
Click to expand...

This exactly,

Given the details in the OPs post, if I was the rider, I would be paying out and if I was the driver, I would be furious if the rider refused to.

If we turn it around and the car had hit a pothole and 'bounced' into the horse while overtaking, HHO would be up in arms and certainly blaming the driver.
 
As a legal professional my advice would be:
1. Don't take legal advice from a bunch of strangers on fb or hho who don't have the full facts. If you want legal advice see a qualified specialist lawyer.
2. Never ever ride in public without 3rd party liability cover, you are very lucky this is a claim for £400 not £4million.
3. Check your own, your parent's and the horse owners insurance policies, especially home contents, for any legal cover or 3rd party cover as often people have cover they didn't realise they had and proper legal advice will be of benefit if you can get it economically.
4. Don't just hand cash over to a stranger, make sure you get something in writing if you decide to pay, and have a witness.
 
Oh and for all those saying "phone the BHS legal helpline" this is a service for members not all and sundry who were too tight to pay the very reasonable membership fee to support an organisation that is so important to our sport. It is less than £60 a year and includes up to £10 million worth of 3rd party liability cover.
 
If I was the driver and your 'horse jumped sideways bouncing off my car' and causing damage I'd be expecting horse owner to pay. I amazes me that people don't have even the most basic of insurance (regardless of it being a legal requirement or not).
 
FB poster should cough her pocket money up and pay for the damage. She has admitted HER horse jumped into the car, not the other way round. If i was the car driver i would be fuming, the riders had the opportunity to move into a layby and chose not too, the fact one of the horses wouldn't stand still is not his problem. I am not sure how the driver is 'bullying' why should he lose his no claims, some may say it is only £400 but why should he have to pay for the damage.
Responsibilities of owning a horse do not stop at the stable but covering you and yourself for this sort of issue. The horse could have spooked into someone and caused massive injuries, would they expect to walk away from that one too?
 
Last edited:
Samuelissimo said:
Oh, I get this c**p all the time - I live in London. You are parking and reverse into someone's license plate holder, causing small dent scratch, or bump someone's wing mirror because they were parked in a traffic lane, causing slight but hardly worth bothering about damage. They demand that you pay - to them, direct, some amount or other.
Refuse!! Make them claim on their insurance, which they don't want to do, because, guess what, they will lose their no claims bonus.
Doesn't matter if its horse-caused or otherwise, let him use the insurance system to sort out; also doesn't matter if you are not insured. DO NOT LET PEOPLE BULLY YOU INTO PAYING THEM DIRECTLY!!
If insurance company were to get involved (trust me, I've been there) they would probably find liability on both sides. They hardly ever find that damage is caused by one party only. And if they realised that the other party was an uninsured kid on an uninsured horse, they might pay the driver for his damage, but would then increase his premiums substantially. They wouldn't bother to chase kid/horse.
Click to expand...

How about having some morals - you do damage to someone's property then yes YOU should pay. Would you refuse if your kids kicked a ball and broke the neighbours front room window??? If you can't park without thumping someone else's property then how did you get a driving licence. I had a 4x4 hit my wing mirror right off because the lane was narrow and he was going at a ridiculous speed - I had stopped before he hit me, and he just bu**ered off without stopping. I got a replacement from the scrappy for £40 whereas a new one would have cost over £100 so hardly small change. But why should I have paid for it? And before you shout about insurance, my excess is £250 so I couldn't have claimed anyway.
 
I am HUGELY shocked and stunned to read the amount of posts saying "wouldn't pay....don't admit liability"
Her horse spooked and damaged a passing motorists car. She is therefore liable for the damage caused. Accident or not, her horse caused damage.
Its no wonder motorists are becoming more and more "anti horse" with riders on the road if this is what they have to contend with when a horse damages a car.
Its also why anyone on the road should be at least 3rd party liability insured.
 
For those saying that the driver should just seek a payment through his own insurance, bear in mind that the insurance company will look to recoup its losses and will pursue the rider for a damages payment. In the long run this could well end up costing the rider more money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top