Damage to car windscreen at council Leisure Centre

[myhandle97]

I don't know if there is any mileage in this but though it worth a try.

 

A friend of mine was driving away from the council run leisure centre when a football was kick from an outdoor pitch, over the fencing, hitting his windscreen whilst moving and causing damage to the screen which will require replacement.

 

Standard notices on the wall state that cars are left and parked at the owner's risk. Does this imply any acceptance of risk by the council when cars are moving, rather than left or parked ?

 

Attempts to reason with the party playing football, one of whom had kicked the ball, failed to gain any acceptance of responsibility. They were using the erected sign as their exemption from responsibility, though surely any such sign can only state that the landowner does not accept responsibility and does not extend to all users of the site.

 

In the absence of the truly guilty party accepting responsibility, can the council be sued for a loss ?

[Conniff]

I don't believe that it is lawful to try and exempt themselves by leaving a notice like that. You see them in cloakrooms but they have no validity and when I was brought off my bike by a football kicked over a school wall, the bill was sent to the council who paid no problem.

Of course, they are a lot tighter now and have the same attitude as used car salesmen and couldn't give a damn about you or the public in general, so you might have to write a few time and escalate it.

 

 

You will, of course, need something to back up your story, ie cctv or witnesses.

[rebel11]

Hi myhandle97

 

You car insurance policy will state that you must report all accidents or damage to your vehicle, why not report the incident and get them to chase the party responsible. See if there is an CCTV on the incident.

[2ltr16valve]

Hi myhandle97

 

You car insurance policy will state that you must report all accidents or damage to your vehicle, why not report the incident and get them to chase the party responsible. See if there is an CCTV on the incident.

 

I would think because fault or not it will result in an increase in price. I had non fault claim and my insurance went up £400+ following year. Full liability from other side too

[rebel11]

Even if your not going to claim, you should tell them, it's in their T & C's.

Makes you wonder why you pay premiums

 

I would think because fault or not it will result in an increase in price. I had non fault claim and my insurance went up £400+ following year. Full liability from other side too

[2ltr16valve]

Even if your not going to claim, you should tell them, it's in their T & C's.

Makes you wonder why you pay premiums

 

Sadly be surprised what they put on system or CUE. Was on watchdog a while ago. Customers Calling to enquire about claims having it logged as an incident resulting in increased premiums.

Insurance is largely legalised extortion. We must have it so they charge what they like mostly

[Ganymede]

I don't believe that it is lawful to try and exempt themselves by leaving a notice like that. You see them in cloakrooms but they have no validity and when I was brought off my bike by a football kicked over a school wall, the bill was sent to the council who paid no problem.

Of course, they are a lot tighter now and have the same attitude as used car salesmen and couldn't give a damn about you or the public in general, so you might have to write a few time and escalate it.

 

 

You will, of course, need something to back up your story, ie cctv or witnesses.

 

 

 

 

I assume you suffered an injury which is different to property damage.

[Conniff]

No injury, damage to the bike side panel and front wing. The teacher who came out might have been injured by the verbal abuse I gave him, but that was shock more than anything.

[SuperVillain]

This is an Occupiers Liability and/or negligence issue.

 

If the footballers weren't doing anything out of the ordinary they can't really be said to be negligent and did they owe you any sort of duty of care in the first place? In Wooldridge v Sumner it was held by the Court that a sportsperson doesn't owe a duty of care to spectators and would only be liable for damage caused recklessly or deliberately. Were their actions reckless or deliberate?

 

It clear that the Council owe you a duty of care under the Occupiers Liability Acts. The Council erected a fence to stop this kind of accident from happening. Was this enough to satisfy that duty - possibly but it depends on the facts - it's a test of reasonableness.

 

How high was this fence? Does it stop the majority of footballs leaving the playing area? These are probably the questions that would need to be answered...

[SuperVillain]

Maybe an initial step would be to write to the Council and ask them to consider the claim and if they won't, to disclose the identity of their public liability insurers so the claim can be reported to them for investigation.

[dacouc]

This is an Occupiers Liability and/or negligence issue.

 

If the footballers weren't doing anything out of the ordinary they can't really be said to be negligent and did they owe you any sort of duty of care in the first place? In Wooldridge v Sumner it was held by the Court that a sportsperson doesn't owe a duty of care to spectators and would only be liable for damage caused recklessly or deliberately. Were their actions reckless or deliberate?

 

It clear that the Council owe you a duty of care under the Occupiers Liability Acts. The Council erected a fence to stop this kind of accident from happening. Was this enough to satisfy that duty - possibly but it depends on the facts - it's a test of reasonableness.

 

How high was this fence? Does it stop the majority of footballs leaving the playing area? These are probably the questions that would need to be answered...

 

Bolton v Stone

[SuperVillain]

Bolton v Stone

 

Good shout