Son Hit by Car Whilst at School

[vivalavida]

Several weeks ago my 12 year old son was hit by a car whilst at school. The school is split across two sites with a rarely used single track road running through the middle. This is classed as a public highway although as I say very rarely used as it is not a through road.
My son was crossing at a blind spot with other children going from one lesson to another. They were unsupervised and this is normal practice. As my son stepped out of the blind spot to see if the road was clear, he was hit by young driver in her car. The impact was enough for him to smash the windscreen and he was taken to hospital.
Very luckily he walked away with only major bruising.
After a week off school and two weeks off sport he is now almost physically recovered, however we have now received contact from the driver asking for damages.
There were no direct witnesses to the accident apart from the driver's partner who was also in the car and my son's friend who is also 12.
It is still very difficult to ascertain who is ultimately at fault and we are reluctant to enter into a conversation without advice first.
The other issue is that the school seem non-plussed about the fact that our son has been injured whilst in their care, regardless of who's fault the accident was.
I really don't want to jeopardise his education by falling out with the school as he is happy there and doing well, however, if we do pay then we are admitting liability and may leave ourselves open to future claims.
Any advice would be greatfully received.

[bakingaddict]

I don't think 'no win no fee' merchants generally advise to write directly to the other party. It's normally all conducted through the insurer's solicitors and any you have instructed.

People who hassle you like that are more than likely chancers without the benefit of proper legal advice and are trying to bully you into paying.

[LeeCoakley]

I would be so angry with the school! They should be putting in place signs, safe crossing places, talking about the dangers with the pupils etc. How can they allow children to cross at a blind spot? Are the children made aware of the dangers? As for not wanting to upset them, that would be the least of my worries.

[squeakytoy]

Lets say any of you drivers on here were involved in an accident that wasnt your fault, and sustained expensive damage to your car.. would you just accept it?

[RedHelenB]

That's what comprehensive insurance is for.

[ratbagcatbag]

I am aware of a case with a friend of mine many years ago where he was on a newish motorbike in a built up area and a three to four year old ram out between cars, he had to swerve and just missed her but as his bike skidded down the road it was wrecked. He successfully sued the parents for the cost of a new bike. He was glad he'd obviously missed the child but was still looking at a couple of thousand pounds for his bike to be replaced.

[mercibucket]

If I ran over a pedestrian I would never ever ever ever ever write to them asking them to pay for damage to my car, unless they had both done it maliciously and then been an utter tosser about it as well. I would simply pay for the damage out of my own pocket or claim on my insurance. That is what comprehensive insurance is for. There is no need to go through life being a twat.

[Aboutlastnight]

Yes if you are insured then you can get car fixed.

[VoiceofUnreason]

I'm actually surprised at quite the level of hostility towards the driver who, by the OP's own admission, struck the child because the child crossed the road at a blind spot. Which sounds as if there was very little the driver could have done - even if they were going relatively slowly they probably couldn't have stopped in time if they literally found the child in the road. I bet the driver was very shocked and may have thought they'd killed them at first. Of course it's worse for the injured party, but a frightening thing none the less.

The child should have been properly supervised by the school who should have proper procedures in place to ensure children get across from one site to the other in safety.

While no one wants a child to be hurt in any way, shape or form, I can understand why a driver MIGHT want to persue a claim. Not everyone has fully comprehensive insurance or they may have a very high excess, especially if they are a younger driver. Seems somewhat unfair if they lost a no claims bonus if they technically weren't at fault.

Having said this, I realise many people would feel morally that they would feel awkward in claiming and choose not to. Whether the claim should be placed at the door of the school for lack of supervision is another point, but I think so much hostility to the driver is rather unfair.

[Hobbitation]

Sounds like the driver should sue the school, not the pedestrian. The boy's parents should probably sue the school also. Really, a public road through school grounds, and a blind spot?

[squeakytoy]

Not everyone has comprehensive insurance or the money to fork out for repairs.

And a 12yo should have the common sense to cross a road with care.

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

Squeaky, it's not as simple as that - in the car -v- pedestrian situation, the onus is on a car driver to be more aware than the pedestrian by virtue of the damage a car can cause a person as opposed to the damage a person can cause a car. When it's complicated by the fact the pedestrian is a child, then the odds are stacked even higher against the driver in proving negligence. The only way this driver could say with certainty that they could not avoid a collision is if the OPs DS had somehow stepped out onto the road after the car had begun to pass, and damaged the side of the car. The fact the boy has caused damaged to the front i.e. windscreen suggests the boy was in the road before the car reached that point, and it's up to the driver to be able to react and avoid an obstruction in those circumstances. If the driver has been driving at a speed which prevented them from being able to react and avoid hitting a pedestrian, then again, further evidence that the boy cannot be held liable for causing damage to the car. It's always a massive risk trying to sue a pedestrian who is also a child because if the driver's driving has contributed even 1% to the cause of the accident, the child would be successful in gaining 100% of any compensation they could seek, as no court is going to hold a child liable for their own injuries in those circumstances. The blame doesn't then 'transfer' to the parent either. Ultimately, the driver here hasn't got a leg to stand on with their 'claim', and while the OP can ignore and hope they'll get the message, it's worth taking advice in terms of whether the school is covered for this \s it happened during school time so the OP can let them deal with the correspondence, or check the legal cover they have on their home contents policy etc.

[iamapushymum]

This happened to someone I know.Their elderly father was knocked down by a motorcyclist and the motorcyclist (successfully) sued for damage to his bike and jeans!!
However your son has no assets and you were in no way being negligent, so they have absolutely no claim against you.It would be the LEA if anyone that they should sue.
I think it would actually be a good thing if they did.Youngsters crossing a road unsupervised during the school day is just asking for trouble

[Hobbitation]

And a 12yo should have the common sense to cross a road with care.

And I think the school has a high duty of care to protect children in their care, including preventing accidents by providing a safe route to cross the road and blocking off any particularly dangerous areas, such as blind spots.

[RedHelenB]

But surely you should be driving with more care near a school in any case. Iamapushymum - did the case in question go to court?

[ohmeohmy]

children's legal services free

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

Voice, if it was a blind bend to the boy, then the same applies to the driver, but the onus is on the driver to adjust their driving to be able to react if there was a hazzard beyond their line of vision on approaching the blind bend. even if that means reducing your speed to a crawl, then that's what you would be expected to do, especially where there is a possibility of children being there.

[mercibucket]

If you don't get comprehensive insurance then you take that risk, yes. Often comprehensive insurance is cheaper than third party. It has been for me for the last 5 years renewals as I always compare. There are plenty of situations where you won't be able to sue but have to fork out yourself. My dad hit a deer a few years ago and wrote off his car. Not much chance of suing the deer.

But that's not my point, really. If you run someone over, and particularly a child, how could you then sue them? What kind of person would that make you? I would far rather have a dent in my car than write to the parents of a child I had injured, asking for money. I think it is morally reprehensible to be honest. Yes, some people do it. No, that does not make it right.

If that child had bounced off my windscreen, I would be asking myself a lot of questions about how fast I was driving for the conditions, not writing snotty letters to the parents.

In the op's shoes, I would now be chasing them for a personal injury case, big time.

[flow4]

viva, I'm glad your son is OK!

I'm not a lawyer, and you/your son should take legal advice (if this isn't just a personal letter from the driver 'trying it on' ), but there are a few things I am pretty sure about:

• Any claim the driver might want to make would be against your son, not you. He was not in your care and he wasn't going anywhere on your direction (e.g. an errand) so you have no liability in this situation.
  

• The school may have some liability, because he was in their care. If the driver isn't at fault, then they may have a claim against the school. You/your son may do too.
  

• The circumstances of the accident suggest that the driver may have more liability than your son. Drivers are expected to take extra care near schools, near bends, and where there may be children or other hazards. It may be worth considering a counter-claim.
  

• It is unlikely that an insurance company or lawyer would pursue a claim against your son, because of his age, lack of assets, the fact that pedestrian children don't tend to have personal insurance, and the reasonable likelihood that a court would rule that he was not liable.
  

• If by any remote chance the driver does decide to take your son to court, his legal costs will almost certainly be covered by your home insurance.
  

I would definitely be leaning very heavily on the school to reduce risks at that spot - warning signs, escorts, etc. Your local councillors may be useful too, especially if you approach them for help/as allies (ours helped us get a zebra crossing outside our local school).

[LessMissAbs]

This will be an insurance claim by the driver's insurers. You need your own insurance company to write back to them and claim on your behalf so they will back down and settle. I suspect the driver's insurers is expecting you to claim against them for your son's injuries, and getting in first.

If your insurers won't do this (eg lack of cover) you need to contact a solicitor for advice. Even if you pay for only an initial hour of advice and do the rest yourself.

I very much doubt if it went to court, a court would award damages against a child at school who was crashed into by a car, if the claim were defended. You do not necessaarily need a lawyer to defend and its easy enough to fill in the part of the claim to counter claim.

I would say the burden of proof shifts to the driver to prove they were not at fault if they hit a child at school, on school premises, on a part of the school where children cross unsupervised.

You need to let the school know you will be naming them as joint defendents if this claim proceeds.

Was the car driver at work when the accident happened? If so, her employers will be liable and it they you should sue.

Unbelieveble cheek.

[LessMissAbs]

Meant to also say, it is reasonably foreseeable that a child may be injured if allowed to cross a road unsupervised with blind spots unless drivers proceed so slowly so as to always be able to stop in time. The school has been negligent, as well as possibly the driver.

[propertyNIGHTmareBEFOREXMAS]

Sweet baby Jesus! The driver can fuck right off. What a laugh. Contact Her to confirm that you will not be paying any money whatsoever to her.

[upstart68]

Wouldn't this come under the public liability insurance of the school? I'd be seeking legal advice on this.

You might find your house insurance has a public liability element. I know ours gives legal advice under the cover.

But no, I wouldn't just pay up at all. This needs to go through the proper channels. You need professional advice on this.

I had whiplash 20 years ago. I didn't claim as the driver at fault was my friend. Years later I've had no end of problems with my neck. I think it's just useful to get his injuries logged in a legal way in case he has any problems in the future. By paying up you are effectively agreeing he was at fault. When you don't know that's the case at all.