1,5 year old car bump problem.

[rudy691]

Hi

 

The story is:

I didn't put my handbrake on at work car park.

 

 

My car slides slowly and left tiny bump and a scratch on other workers car.

 

 

I straight away offered that I will pay for it.

 

 

Just needed him to obtain a quote.

 

 

After about a month of stalling I've arranged my friend to get the car fixed and I would pay the costs.

 

 

He didn't take the offer

 

 

then as he said he has no other car to ge to work (my friend would have to keep it at the garage for a day).

 

 

After that it was hardly mentioned and I got on with my life.

 

But today, a 1,5 years later he says to me at work that soon he will want some money from me towards the repair costs.

 

 

I said 'are you having a laugh ? A year and a half later ?'

 

 

But he only said that it happened anyway and needs to be repaired.

 

 

Where do I stand here ?

 

 

Surely I wont be paying for scratch that I over a year old and whatever happened to it in that period

[p3t3r]

i dont understand your problem? you caused a scratch, you admitted liability, you offered to pay for repair, then 18 months later you refuse to pay for repair?

[rudy691]

Yes, that's right. I refuse to pay 18 months later. Its a bodywork damaged that was left to rust over 18 months. Something that I offered to sort out on the same day as I know it will get worse over time. I think ill take my chance of him claiming it on insurance as there is no way they will accept the claim after 18 months.

[p3t3r]

ok thanks, now i understand your reasoning.

 

but at the same time, it was your negligence that caused the damage to your colleagues car.

 

the rust which developed over the 18 months should surely not cost a lot to sandpaper away (or whatever method is used) - certainly a less amount than if your colleague decided for repair same day as well as your colleagues other financial losses of not having a car when it is in the garage being repaired and having to rent a car or use taxis etc

 

if your colleague decides to claim through insurance then maybe it is likely the insurance would chase you for the money?

alternatively, your colleague may start legal proceedings against you?

[SabreSheep]

I agree that you should only be responsible for any damage caused at the time.

 

*IF* he were to issue a small claims case he would have to prove his claim. And "Rust" is not gonna support his case.

 

What would support your case is if you had a written quote and offer in writing to him for the repair work and him refuse or ignore it.

 

In law, one has a duty to mitigate losses as far as reasonably practicable. He *Could* of had the work done when you offered and included a weeks worth of public transport costs. That would of mitigated his loss.

 

Verbally I would offer the same amount you did when it happened. State that if that is not considered acceptable then he is free to issue a small claims where you will put him to strict proof of his claim.

 

Also to be considered is the impact of relations at work.

[SabreSheep]

ok thanks, now i understand your reasoning.

 

but at the same time, it was your negligence that caused the damage to your colleagues car.

 

the rust which developed over the 18 months should surely not cost a lot to sandpaper away (or whatever method is used) - certainly a less amount than if your colleague decided for repair same day as well as your colleagues other financial losses of not having a car when it is in the garage being repaired and having to rent a car or use taxis etc

 

if your colleague decides to claim through insurance then maybe it is likely the insurance would chase you for the money?

alternatively, your colleague may start legal proceedings against you?

 

 

Both the Colleague AND the insurance would need to prove their claim. Plus the claimant has not mitigated his losses as far as reasonably practicable.

[rudy691]

I don't have anything written as I did not thought it would end like that. He didn't have any financial losses as he carried on using the car as this bump was nothing serious. He didn't obtain any quote and I couldn't either as I had no access to the car.

[caro]

He'd have to explain why he hadn't claimed before now and allowed it to rust.

[BazzaS]

Both the Colleague AND the insurance would need to prove their claim. Plus the claimant has not mitigated his losses as far as reasonably practicable.

 

Absolutely

A) they have a duty to mitigate their loss (Case law : British Westinghouse)

B) how do you know there hasn't been more damage since? (novus actus interveniens or an intervening act affecting the current damage)

 

If the current bill is the same as any original estimate : pay it.

If the bill has increased : you are only liable for what the original bill would have been.

[rudy691]

Absolutely

A) they have a duty to mitigate their loss (Case law : British Westinghouse)

B) how do you know there hasn't been more damage since? (novus actus interveniens or an intervening act affecting the current damage)

 

If the current bill is the same as any original estimate : pay it.

If the bill has increased : you are only liable for what the original bill would have been.

 

thats the problem - no idea what would be the previous bill, as he never had a quote. and I couldnt do it either. my friend said that fixing this shouldnt cost more than 100 quid. and even with that he didn't bother to fix it.

[DragonFly1967]

For the sake of peace at work, if the repair will cost £100, offer them £50.

 

One of these 'smart repair' companies would've been able to sort it out at the time, while he was at work, in the work car park, so there would've been no "loss of use" of the vehicle. But for whatever reason, they chose not to go down that route and have instead left the vehicle to rust. You're not responsible for that, but you are responsible for the original scratch.

 

Offer to go 50/50 in full & final, and if they don't accept that (for the reasons stated above) any further action they decide to take, insurance or small claims, will surely fail.