Was this lady classed as a pedestrian? (car incident)

[didhedidhe]

I was parked up when a lady pulled up and parked in front of me and got out and opened her boot and tried to pull her pram and the folded wheels out at the same time, while doing this the pram wheels opened and scraped across my bonnet leaving a significant scrape and dent in it.
While she put the pram together and got her little one out and in the pram I got out to see the damage.
I asked for her details and she said she was a pedestrian as she wasn’t actually driving her car and said there’s nothing I can do.
Is she right? Is there no point trying to claim on her insurance?

I have the number plate and dash cam footage but not sure where I stand.

Loading and unloading will be covered under the RTA and therefore is covered under motor insurance

She is unlikely to be covered by car insurance, but her attitude was appalling as she should have offered to pay for the damage.

She was negligent in the way she took her pram out of the boot. Keep the dash cam footage and see if you can track her down, then send her a note letting her know you'd like her to pay the repair costs within 14 days otherwise you intend to take her to the small claims court.

Being a pedestrian is nothing to do with the damage caused - she actively damaged your car whilst it was parked - what is now difficult is she will have no insurance as such - becomes a civil matter to pursue via courts rather than via her car insurance

If that's the case then you should walked down the side of her car with your key sticking out on 'accident' and key every panel.
Would be what she deserved with that attitude!

I think you'll need to claim on your own insurance but make sure you supply details of the car and the dashcam footage.

She's done the damage and is liable. We had to pay up years ago when our son damaged a car with his bike.

Wow so she didn't even offer to pay either?!

Phone your insurer and ask

Depends on the policy. I still don't think unloading liability is required to be part of compulsory motor insurance. Happy to be proved wrong if you have a source of evidence - I'd quite like to know!

@didhedidhe Do you have legal cover on your insurance- they would be the best place to ask how to proceed

Well that's a total new level of CF'ery!

Yes she is classed as a pedestrian and it is accidental damage. You can either claim on your insurance and see if they’ll bother to claim from her (locating her details from her reg) or do it yourself or sue her and hope she has house insurance with legal cover. Personally I’d let it go as there’s really nothing else you can do.

It's not about the type of policy it's about use under the road traffic act. Look up Dunthorne v Bentley to see how wide use of a vehicle can be. Once you are able to able to argue use of the vehicle then it's motor regardless of what the policy says

I've just been reading the judgment (and a subsequent one which considered it - UKI v Pilling which made a different decision albeit on different facts). It's interesting as the judge said that Dunthorne was "borderline" in satisfying the use of vehicle requirement because her journey had been interrupted because she ran out of petrol and her reason for exiting the car was too seek help in obtaining petrol to continue the journey. It was considered it met the "use of the road" benchmark due to being very close in time and proximity to the cessation of driving on the road and intention to promptly resume that same journey.

Whereas in Pilling the judge did not deem the driver carrying out a repair to resume driving of the vehicle was sufficient to fall within the compulsory motor cover. There is another case, Carroll v QBE, where a man was injured after exiting a taxi due to the taxi driver's conduct - court held the circumstances did not arise from use of vehicle as he was walking away on foot and the causal connection with the use of vehicle was lost.

I haven't been able to find a case which considers the point in relation to unloading. I still suspect that because specific additional unloading cover is available and not compulsory that it may well not be an activity considered part of a use of vehicle for the purpose of compulsory motor insurance. The woman who damaged OP's car wasn't taking a step to imminently resume her journey on the road. She was getting a pushchair out to go elsewhere on foot, so the causal chain was growing more remote.

Anyway if OP or her insurer contact the woman's insurers, they will confirm the position. If you are right I will graciously acknowledge that.