This evening, a Land Rover Discovery and trailer left the road, went through the front garden, and hit my parents in law's house. Upon hearing the noise, my father in law ran out and tried to stop the driver, who reversed out, nearly hitting my father in law, before driving off.
Thankfully, no-one was hurt.
Before the impact, the trailer being towed by the Discovery overturned in the road outside. Using the number plate on the trailer, the police traced the driver. When apprehended by the police, who to their credit acted very quickly, the driver of the Discovery was found to be 3 times over the limit. His liberty is currently being denied him.
So, their front garden has been wrecked, and some of the internal walls were cracked. A more thorough survey of the structural damage will take place in the light, tomorrow, although it is clear that the house remains habitable.
What should my parents in law do?
They are talking about getting a local builder to come round to look at the damage. Would it be better to engage a surveyor to assess the damage?
Would I be right to say that they should be claiming for the repair of this damage from the driver's insurance policy; although my parents in law should inform their house insurers?
Number_Cruncher
|
|
Obtain the insurance details of the driver. He/she is liable.
|
Obtain the insurance details of the driver. He/she is liable.
Really? ;-)>>
|
|
|
|
A similar senario ( accident involving my house and somebody else's tractor ) happened to me some years ago.
The tractor owner ( not the driver, who was his employee ) admitted liability , however I claimed off my house insurance who then recovered the damages off the tractor owner's public liability insurance.
I subsequently sucessfully claimed my building insurance excess and a consideration for my time spent in administering the claim ( sourcing builders etc ) directly from the tractor owner.
Of course in my instance the tractor owner was co-operative, hopefully in your case the Discovery driver will have insurance to cover his misdeeds
----------------------------------------------
One mans junk is another mans treasure
|
|
|
I have little time to give you a full answer, however they should go to their household insurer and follw their advice and process.
I assume that the house is insured; do you know anything about the policy ?
|
|
|
Thank you all for your replies.
Xileno - Yes, I agree, the chap in the Discovery is definitely responsible for the damage to the house and garden.
Steptoe - I think that my parents in law will be approaching their home insurers. The suggestion of claiming back the excess is something that we hadn't thought of - thanks.
I too hope that the chap is going to be co-operative, however, his behaviour at the scene makes me a little apprehensive.
Mark - Yes, their house is insured, with NU. What are the salient details of a household policy which can affect a claim of this kind?
|
|
It might be worth considering that if the driver of the vehicle was not driving within the terms of his insurance policy, ie drink driving / towing unsafe or unroadworthy trailer, they could refuse claim.
|
They could refuse his claim, but not the claim of a NC's FiL, as the third party cover remains whatever conditions are breached.
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
1. Inform their house insurance company and seek their help. They will as they willl want to avoid losing out and they have a vested interest in securing the property to prevent further loss i.e. falling roof through weakend walls etc. Depending on the wording of the policy there may be legal cover, get it engaged if required.
2. If he is insured, the Police will already know this from the PNC database, he is obliged by law to provide them (the householders) with his company details.
3. As mfarrow says third party liability will be looked after regardless of being drunk towing trailer picking nose etc.
|
|
|
|
Mike Farrow is quite right! Third-party cover cannot be denied by an insurer. The house-owners (or their insurers) would have a claim against the driver and his insurers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there is structural damage they should have a survey and report done by a Structural Engineer, not just a builder. But if they just contact their insurance company, the company should sort this out for them, and they may have Engineers they prefer to use.
|
1st Reassure your parents this is not uncommon, whats happened to them has happened to lots of people before.
2nd The house insurer has dealt with similar things loads of times Inform them and a surveyor retained by them will be round very quickly.
3rd consider making a complaint alongs the lines of attempted assault, I am sure there is something to be charged for in the driving away and nearly running your FIL over.If the old bill try and slap this one on him he might plead guilty down to lesser charges and save your parents time and agro.
4 Unfourtunatley your parents will now have the house insurance policy loaded next time, the property now has a "risk" flagged against it. Consider this is any private action you may wish to take against the driver.
--
RF - Da DAA. < changes in phone box > Its TOURVAN man
|
Certainly have a professionally qualified Structural Engineer or surveyor do the inspection rather than a hairy builder.
The former will have much more authority if it ever needs to go to court - the cost of having the survey done should be part and parcel of any repair works and claim.
try www.istructe.org.uk to search for local qualified engineers
I hope they werent to shaken by the shock
|
The first priority is that no one was hurt.
The next is the house....
Like others have said, your inlaws should contact their house insurers straight away.
Their insurers should handle it from their. They will organise whatever professionals will be needed, and will set up temporary accommodation if needed.
They musn't concern themselves with increased insurances at the moment. That comes later. However, all costs should be record, starting from NOW.
Finally, they do have my sympathy. It's not nice being involved in this sort of thing.
Best of luck!
Hugo
H
|
|
|
|
The correct approach is to inform the house insurers (buildings and contents as they may be separate)and they will respond by sending builders to secure/shore up the property and assessors at a later date to prperly assess what has to be done - insurance co will send their preferred surveyors etc pay for fees of structural engineer, architect etc to get the property back to a suitable state.
If the building is obviously badly damaged then the local council will come along and assure you it is safe or not.
If unsafe move into rented accommodation, hotel/guest house in the short term.
The buildings contents etc and all expenses will be paid through the buildings and contents insurance (except say 1st £100/or so excess)
The fact that a Vehicle caused the damage is only a concern of the house insurer - they will get their money back from the vehicle insurer. Any uninsured losses you will claim from the vehicle insurer when all is settled.
|
|
|
Thanks again for all who have contributed their thoughts, experience and knowledge.
It is true, we were concerned that if the driver of the Discovery were drunk that his insurance might be in some way invalidated. However, as Mike, PU, and HisHonour point out, that isn't really a concern for my parents in law because their home insurers will persue the drivers insurance which can't avoid its third party liabilities.
Otherwise, the process seems to be going pretty much in the direction that the Backroom has suggested.
My FiL contacted his insurers. They sent their builder round, who checked to make sure nothing was in immediate danger, and he made some small repairs to the roof and guttering to prevent further damage. The builder said that as it isn't in danger of falling down, it will be repaired after Christmas.
On Monday, a surveyor, sent by the insurers, will be coming round to assess the extent of the damage.
So, immediate actions I shall suggest to them are to make a list of all costs, keeping receipts from now (thanks Hugo) and to make steps towards obtaining the other driver's insurance details.
Although the driver nearly ran my FiL down, he can't be sure that the driver had seen him. i.e., he can't be sure it was a deliberate act.
Thankfully, no-one was hurt, and I think that despite the violence of the impact and subsequent exit by the Discovery both of my parents in law have taken it pretty well, and are coping.
Thanks,
Number_Cruncher
|
|
Oh ! Just as a technical point, there isn't such a thing as an attempted assault. It either is or there isn't (unlawful use of force blah di blah), I feel there may be an assault here but really pushing the technical bounderies....
|
Oh ! Just as a technical point, there isn't such a thing as an attempted assault. It either is or there isn't (unlawful use of force blah di blah), I feel there may be an assault here but really pushing the technical bounderies....
Dangerous driving though, surely? Although perhaps no case if the attempt at running over his FIL was within the garden!
|
|
|
|
NC
I'm pleased to hear they're coping well.
I would guess that they'll still need all the support the family can give them at the moment.
I suspect it's highly unlikely that the driver was aiming for your FiL, especially as he was towing a trailer. I'm no expert in criminal behaviour but if the driver planned to deliberately injure your FiL, I guess he would have left the trailer at home and not attached to the vehicle. My guess is that he panicked and did a runner.
On a personal note, I do property repairs for a living, so, whilst I cannot give you specific advice about structural damage, if you have any questions concerning repairs done to the property feel free to put them on the IHAQ thread and if I can answer them I will.
H
|
Hugo
I didnt mean to suggest he hoitched up a trailer and headed for the FILs house to kill him.
However after an accident, if trying to flee the scene, panick or not, you aim for or try to run over someone trying to stop you, then all sorts of charges are possible.
--
RF - Da DAA. < changes in phone box > Its TOURVAN man
|
|
I thought an assault was defined as a victim being in fear of his/her safety, not necessarily a physical attack.
|
Assault is defined in Offences Against the Person and at Common Law - where there is no definition. Recent cases suggest that a Police Officer drawing a baton and not moving to strike is enough to prove an assault. Likewise a bop on the nose or even preparing a fist (IYKWIM) is enough to prove an assault, that's why I corrected RF in saying that there is no such thing as an attempted assault.
The circumstances outlined originally might lead the Police to a conclusion that an assault occured - rare but I've seen it happen.
|
|
|
|
|
