Storm blew crate through car window

[Ethel Street]

The answer in practice is probably very little.

 

The shopkeeper is not automatically responsible for something that that blows out of his shop premises or legally liable for the damage it causes. She would have to prove that the shopkeeper was negligent in the way he had stored the bread crate and that he should have reasonably foreseen that in windy weather it might blow out and damage cars parked the other side of the fence.  Only then might he be laible for the damage.

 

When the storm was as strong as it was last Friday it would be difficult (but not impossible) to prove the shopkeeper was negligent.

 

She should also bear in mind that even if she did prove he was negligent courts would not order him to pay the cost of replacing the car seat and the pram with new items. They would only order him to pay the second hand value. Car seats in particular have very little second hand value, second hand and charity shops normally won't take them.

 

Have a look and see what it costs to buy the same or similar car seat and pram of the same age and condition as the ones made unusuable by the broken glass. Your partner will need to know that if she wants to start a formal claim against him.

 

It may be so low as to be not worth suing the shopkeeper for, although if she did sue she'd also sue for the £100 windscreen excess.

 

You say the car insurer refused the claim as it wasn't accident related but that doesn't sound right. The car seat and pram have clearly been made unusable - ie, damaged - by an accident, by the crate smashing into the car. It's worth going back to them to argue the rejection. But first check if car seats and contents like a pram are insured under the policy. Not all motor polices cover them.

 

Incidentally, the shopkeeper has no legal duty to tell you who his insurer is. He was entitled to refuse your request for his insurance details. 

 

Is he a small shopkeeper running his own business? If yes then he might decide to settle if your partner sends him a formal of claim because otherwise he might have to shut his shop for the day to attend court. We can advise on the procedure if she wants to do that.

 

Keep the film safe. It will be vital evidence for any claim.

[Ethel Street]

I'm afraid I disagree that this could be brought as a "strict liability" claim against the shopkeeper using the rule the rule in Rylands v Fletcher.

 

I believe it would have to be a normal negligence claim. It won't be impossible to prove negligence by the shopkeeper although my personal view is it will be difficult given the circumstances of there having been the strongest winds for many years in Storm Eunice. Although in one way that would help you as the shopkeeper had plenty of warning to expect exceptional winds and you can argue that he should have taken extra care to tie down anything that could blow out of his yard. 

 

I dealt with insurance claims professionaly for many years before I retired and I have never seen a 'Rylands' v Fletcher' claim succeed in cases like this.

 

[For the legally minded on here,  the leading case law on this is the House of Lords decision in Transco v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council [2003]) which said the rule Rylands and Fletcher could ony apply where the use of the land was "extraordinary and unusual" and that what the occupier brought on to the land presented an "exceptionally high risk of danger or mischief if there should be an escape". I cannot see how a case like this could meet those requirements, although I am not a lawyer.]

 

However @CrazeUKdon't get bogged down in legal theories here. Simply by submitting a formal letter of claim the shopkeeper might decide it's easier and cheaper to pay you without ever going to court. Going to court and dealing with all the paperwork will take up a lot of his time and if he's on his own he may not want that. 

 

That said though I think it more likely he will just pass your partner's letter of claim to his insurers and you will be in for a battle with them.