Electric scooter kid went flying after hitting my car door

And that is illegal to use unless on private property

It's her parents who are at fault though. They should never have given her something she couldn't control

You were driving but opened your door onto the pavement? Does that mean you parked against the traffic flow? Rule 239?????

Shocked how many people are supporting the OP, regardless of you feel about her she’s a child and the lack of care is actually shocking

I think I would be tempted to report this to the Police. I completely understand that approaching the family yourself won't work, but if the rumour mill starts and the story grows arms and legs you know you have made an account. Also a PCSO may go and talk to the family and child about safety on an e-scooter.

I can't believe parents are still buying them.

An in law of mine bought one for their teenager costing £600, and the first day he went out on it, it was seized by the police. Why would you want to risk losing that amount of money?

Unfortunately it's just not that simple. If you cause a collision by opening a door you could always be held wholly or partly responsible for any injury/damage that occurs regardless of whether the cyclist was breaking the law or not. (Consider causing an accident with another motorist by pulling out in front of them, however they're not taxed/insured so just as illegal as the electric scooter, however this obviously wouldn't suddenly absolve you of any culpability in the incident). Clearly their dangerous/inappropriate riding could be argued as a mitigation but it absolutely won't be an instant 'you're not at fault'.

The person answering your call/taking the details won't be a legal specialist so unfortunately not worth anything.

The default position tends to be anyone hitting a more vulnerable user is considered at fault, and they are the one who needs to argue to defend themselves from any prosecution/claim. It would be considered a normal hazard to consider children cycling on the pavement and there is a clear expectation in law to check for their/other presence before opening the door.

I'm not meaning to defend the child, I agree the parents of said child must be a bit thick, agree they shouldn't be riding an electric scooter on the pavement, but the OP in this instance will be on the back foot if any claim is made. Especially if this has been a collision with injury involving a child that hasn't been reported to police.

There's quite an interesting case law here re mitigating factors:
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/349.html
Essentially around 8pm/dark - a cyclist was travelling on the pavement without lights, they jumped off the pavement into the path of a car and went over the bonnet. Ruling was 50:50 responsibility for the incident after mitigating factors were considered - those included the cyclist was being safer choosing to ride on the pavement given they didn't have bike lights and there was street lighting - which meant the driver would have been able to see them on the pavement and should have slowed down earlier anticipating that they could have come off the pavement into the road.... Thus they shared responsibility for the crash equally with the cyclist.

Literally this! I can’t believe the people defending the OP it’s actually a state.

So this is the second time you’ve knocked someone with your car door and yet it’s definitely not you… right. Sure.

She must have come down that road as though there was not, and couldn't possibly be, anything else to consider except her own fun.

OP, you knocked a child off her scooter, didn't check on her, and instead have said some really snide and bitchy things about her. She's 8. You're an absolute weapon.

Horrible thing to say about a child having an accident.

The driver of the car I was in only reported it because the car door was broken.

I'm not sure if I'd report it or not in your case tbh. It's probably good you asked the question!

It's about expectation and reasonable belief.

Someone going so fast on a pavement that you can't see if they're coming means they are at fault.

You cannot reasonably expect a fast traveling object in a pavement.

If it was a jogger, fair enough. A scooter? No, it's not reasonable to expect that to be coming towards you on a pavement. Nor a cantering pony, a speeding cyclist or a sprinter.
If it was opening a car door to a road, yes you should look for that. Not on a pavement.

OP says she checked she was OK and later "She seemed to want to get away from me."

It is generally frowned upon to force a child to stay with you or to follow them home.

The child rode into the car door, OP didn't knock her off her scooter by opening the door into her. It was getting dark the child was dressed in black, travelling at speed where OP didn't expect her to be. She previously saw her going in the opposite direction so wouldn't have expected her to be coming back. The car door wasn't fully open so the child must have been very close to the car which would have made her harder to spot.

Difficult families with out of control children do exist. Let's not pretend they don't.

Whilst that is true you are also not allowed to carelessly open doors in front of people so they crash into them. The OP has at least partial blame for the incident.

So you failed to look properly and see someone coming down the pavement. I nearly got killed on a roundabout by a driver with a similar level of observation. Yes you are being unreasonable and should use the experience as a warning to LOOK PROPERLY BEFORE OPENING A CAR DOOR.

Also, insurance didn't even question me. Cyclist on the pavement? Not your fault.

I would imagine it's the same with a scooter.

This. All of it but particularly the last paragraph. Your lack of concern for the girl is evident and pretty horrible.

This happened to me once op.
You won't get in trouble.

I was in the passenger seat, child in the back. I told child to stay while I opened the door. I looked all the way behind me, noone one on the pavement, opened the door, and a cyclist crashed so fast into the car door he went flying over it. Broke the door.
He was up and off so quickly that by the time I was out of the car he was gone.
It was filmed. I was found not at fault by the car drivers insurance. Noone knows who he was, he never came forward.

I was paranoid for months, still am tbh, that he was seriously hurt. But it was totally his fault.
I LOOKED I remember looking. I told my child to stay in the car because I didn't want her to open the door on a pedestrian.

The whole bloody pub garden opposite saw, and though I was convinced I'd be a pariah, everyone said it was not my fault.

It's not your fault. Pavements are for pedestrians.

You are not allowed to ride electric scooters on pavements or roads. You are not to blame .

You're subtly trying to portray her as some of feral kid who gets fashionable clothes and an electric scooter for Christmas and just roams on the streets, unsupervised. She is therefore less important than a child who loves her piano, as you do.

You're trying to garner support by trying to relate this kid on a scooter to cyclists riding triple abreast, a delivery driver on his phone with no vehicle lights (doubtless delivering pizza to this girl's "rude" family") to get us to go all daily mail and victim blame.

You knocked a child off her scooter. You had already seen her on the street and seen she was on a large electric vehicle. You failed to gauge her speed correctly. Worse still, you failed to follow up whether she was injured and left her to make her own way home.

The legality and stupidity of the scooter is secondary here: Your failure to ensure her well-being after the accident, so you could minimise your role and avoid blame is the primary concern.

If they’re going at 15mph or more then they’ll easily travel over 5 metres in a second - I find it difficult to see or stop for them when reversing into my drive with cars and trucks half parked over the pavement. The police need to start confiscating and destroying them.