Advertisement

loader

Talk

Advanced search

This topic is for discussing childcare options. If you want to advertise, please use your Local site.

Car damage - who is responsible?

(15 Posts)
Octonought Tue 26-Apr-16 19:20:12

So we have a wonderful nanny who we are generally very happy with and we would be lost without her.

Today, she took my two youngest to the playgroup then the park in her car. It is less than 10 minutes walk but she chose to drive, which she often does. Fine by me but unnecessary. She usually uses her own car, but knows my husband will get the train if she wants to use our car to travel any distance. She has a very nice sports car so not practical for long trips.

Anyway. Recently, whilst her back was turned at the park, my toddler got a stone and scratched the bodywork of her car. She is understandably upset.

I feel we should pay for the damage (which is quite superficial).
Problem is, my DH thinks that it is her responsibility. He feels that she doesn't need to drive as much as she does (I do agree with this), it wouldn't have happened if she had walked, and if she was supervising the kids properly, it couldn't have happened. I can understand his viewpoint but don't think it's worth falling out about.

Who's right?

GinIsIn Tue 26-Apr-16 19:27:22

What? Of course you should pay! Your child keyed her car. Whether she could have walked is entirely irrelevant!

Anon2309 Tue 26-Apr-16 22:05:11

Are you serious? Our child damaged her car and you think because she could've walked you don't have to pay? Of course you should pay, what kind of question is this

Karoleann Tue 26-Apr-16 22:20:32

I completely disagree, she should have been supervising your children (its her job and you pay her to do it.) A toddler isn't responsible for its own actions, the person supervising him/her is.

starry0ne Tue 26-Apr-16 22:25:24

What if child had damaged someone else's car? I think you would be responsible not sure how it varies because it is her car.

I think the 2 issues are separate. If you want to talk to her about not using car on short distances that is one conversation..Damage to her car is another.

Thisismyfirsttime Tue 26-Apr-16 22:30:58

I'd go halves on the cost with her, she should have been supervising your child but your child did cause the damage. I'd wonder how it happened though, if it was on your drive at your house I'd say pay the full lot but if it was on a road/ in a car park how did she have her eyes off a toddler long enough for that to happen?

BombadierFritz Tue 26-Apr-16 22:36:54

You could offer to pay the excess? (Is she covered to drive your kids with her job?) Tbh, she was in loco parentis and could have kept a better eye on them.

Tanith Wed 27-Apr-16 00:41:45

Who says she wasn't supervising them? Op says "while her back was turned" so she may well have been dealing with one charge while the other did the damage.

Nor does Op say she doesn't think she should pay; it's her DH who thinks this. Op thinks it is her responsibility to pay for the damage her child caused.

BombadierFritz Wed 27-Apr-16 08:57:10

Oh yes i forgot that mumsnet definition of supervising your kids that means you dont stop them scratching your car. Whenever my kids did something along those lines it was when i wasnt watching them carefully enough.

rollonthesummer Wed 27-Apr-16 09:00:09

Who would be responsible if someone else's car had been scratched?

Paulat2112 Wed 27-Apr-16 09:02:43

You should pay. Just because she had her back turned doesn't mean she wasn't supervising properly. I imagine she was dealing with your other child. You cant keep eyes on them all the time.

BombadierFritz Wed 27-Apr-16 09:09:32

Probably noone would be legally liable unless the carer had been negligent if it had been someone elses car that had been damaged

TheCraicDealer Wed 27-Apr-16 09:13:54

In the interests of maintaining good relations I'd offer to pay half the damage. If it's a single line/scratch then it's likely to be under her policy excess anyway. But I'd make it clear, you know, toddlers do this shit and she was supposed to be supervising the child.

TheCraicDealer Wed 27-Apr-16 09:13:58

In the interests of maintaining good relations I'd offer to pay half the damage. If it's a single line/scratch then it's likely to be under her policy excess anyway. But I'd make it clear, you know, toddlers do this shit and she was supposed to be supervising the child.

Blondeshavemorefun Wed 27-Apr-16 13:21:03

Replied on other thread but the nanny was in charge so she should be responsible

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now