Author Topic: legal question - advice - car accident (Read 21124 times)

Bird · « **Reply #25 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:05:45 PM »

Quote from: Mrs smith on September 12, 2014, 05:00:15 PM

So if someone damages your property and you then sell that property for what ever reason (fixed or not) without receiving compo for the damage, there off the hook ?

why wouldn't you be? unless the owner of the property has paid for repairs themselves, why shouldn't you be? The money is for repairs not a bonus.

Jasjul · « **Reply #26 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:05:57 PM »

Sorry for the change of topic, sort of, but I think the panel beater should be named. he sounds like he's worthy of getting the business of anyone close by.

muzza01 · « **Reply #27 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:16:40 PM »

Quote from: Mrs smith on September 12, 2014, 05:00:15 PM

So if someone damages your property and you then sell that property for what ever reason (fixed or not) without receiving compo for the damage, there off the hook ?

Well I advised her to pay $1000 not the original $1800 as he broke the agreement. We actually don't know if he got the car repaired under insurance elsewhere and is now trying to get the cash out of Mary.

She is not trying to just get off the hook. She did the right think in the first place. She waited for some considerable time for him to return to his car so she could inform him that she damaged the car.
She admitted it was her fault.

She could have said to him she had no money, sue me, but she didn't, she worked out a payment plan with the repairer to try and once again do the right thing. He broke the agreement not her.

oldmate · « **Reply #28 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:19:23 PM »

Quote from: Mrs smith on September 12, 2014, 05:00:15 PM

So if someone damages your property and you then sell that property for what ever reason (fixed or not) without receiving compo for the damage, there off the hook ?

technically no, but if someone damaged my car, then i sold it as is, i would bother chasing for the money. Why does it matter, i dont own the car now, and the girl also showed good faith and paid for it, i would tell her to keep the money its all good. the guy is just being an donkey ( clean word).
But hey thats just me.

Mrs smith · « **Reply #29 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:20:17 PM »

Quote from: Bird on September 12, 2014, 05:05:45 PM

why wouldn't you be? unless the owner of the property has paid for repairs themselves, why shouldn't you be? The money is for repairs not a bonus.

So if someone damaged your property and you have to wait for an unspecified period of time there effectively got the control to stop you from selling your own property ?
I don't think so.

If you damage someones property you are liable for that damage.
If he had it fixed by his insurer there entitled to seek the amount, he may have said it was an unknown offender and got it repaired and still trying to collect a bonus (which is illegal/ fraudulent ).

oldmate · « **Reply #30 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:21:17 PM »

Quote from: Bird on September 12, 2014, 05:05:45 PM

why wouldn't you be? unless the owner of the property has paid for repairs themselves, why shouldn't you be? The money is for repairs not a bonus.

yeah, you typed it nicer than i was thinking it

muzza01 · « **Reply #31 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:22:15 PM »

Quote from: Jasjul on September 12, 2014, 05:05:57 PM

Sorry for the change of topic, sort of, but I think the panel beater should be named. he sounds like he's worthy of getting the business of anyone close by.

Will do when this all gets sorted

oldmate · « **Reply #32 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:24:19 PM »

Quote from: Mrs smith on September 12, 2014, 05:20:17 PM

So if someone damaged your property and you have to wait for an unspecified period of time there effectively got the control to stop you from selling your own property ?
I don't think so.

If you damage someones property you are liable for that damage.
If he had it fixed by his insurer there entitled to seek the amount, he may have said it was an unknown offender and got it repaired and still trying to collect a bonus (which is illegal/ fraudulent ).

thats right, liable for the damage, i bet donkey didnt tell the new owners, all they have to do is take it to such and such smash and the repairs will be taken care of? did he? he just wants compensation now, not money for damage.

muzza01 · « **Reply #33 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:29:51 PM »

Quote from: oldmate on September 12, 2014, 05:24:19 PM

thats right, liable for the damage, i bet donkey didnt tell the new owners, all they have to do is take it to such and such smash and the repairs will be taken care of? did he? he just wants compensation now, not money for damage.

Agree

As I said earlier, she is not my daughter, this is not my problem but I think she has done the right thing and acted with integrity.

Mrs smith · « **Reply #34 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:31:10 PM »

She has done the right thing IMO, I'd now wait for him to take it to the next level before
handing over any $$$ but regardless whether he gets it fixed or not he is still entitled to be compensated for the damage. What he needs to prove is how much the claim is.

EG you have a nice ole car and someone puts a dent in it and you decide you can live with it, doesn't mean there not liable for the repair or the cost of it, it's the owners choice whether he repairs or chooses to live with it.

oldmate · « **Reply #35 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:45:44 PM »

Quote from: Mrs smith on September 12, 2014, 05:31:10 PM

EG you have a nice ole car and someone puts a dent in it and you decide you can live with it, doesn't mean there not liable for the repair or the cost of it, it's the owners choice whether he repairs or chooses to live with it.

god i give up

peterdeg · « **Reply #36 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:52:54 PM »

As far as I know, a verbal contract is just as binding as a written one. Then again, I'm not a lawyer.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Robbo · « **Reply #37 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:57:04 PM »

Quote from: oldmate on September 12, 2014, 05:45:44 PM

god i give up

Yep x2

McGirr · « **Reply #38 on:** September 12, 2014, 05:57:50 PM »

Muz, I have to say its a credit to her for accepting responsibility and doing the right thing. These days it's rare this happens especially from the younger generation.

Mark

Patr80l · « **Reply #39 on:** September 12, 2014, 06:27:28 PM »

I can see why the panel beater wanted money up front. If it was me I would not want to do the repairs then have to chase the disputing parties for payment (I'm sure that's a mistake he would only ever make once).
The panel beater was chosen by the other side and the quote presented to her, so he cant dispute the estimated cost of damages.
If she agreed that she caused $1,800 worth of damages, and she now has that in her pocket, is there a problem with her paying that amount to the car's owner instead of the panel beater? The first posting sounded like she paid $1,800 and was then asked for more. If she got the $1,800 back, then cant she give that to the owner (in stead of the panel beater)?
While the other party may be acting a little strategically with respect to disposing of the car, he has been inconvenienced by her actions and her lack of insurance. She is lucky he didn't hand the matter over to his insurance company (as I would have done) and let the insurance company chase her for payment.

terravista · « **Reply #40 on:** September 12, 2014, 06:55:06 PM »

It seems to me there are heaps of people on here that are lacking in the ethics departmrnt.
The Commodore owner may be decent person. His car is damaged and the repairs are covered by a verbal agreement. He sells the car for whatever reason and shouldn't lose money over it.
If he lost $1800 in sale price I don't see why he should be left out of pocket.
However, I find it hard to believe he would have dropped $1800 for damage received from a low spped prang, so I would leave it up to a mediator.
The other thing is this guy has the address, and with all the crazies around, not being reasonable may have consequences.
Cheers

Mallory Black · « **Reply #41 on:** September 12, 2014, 06:56:37 PM »

If this was in front of a magistrate...
Pretty sure that at the end of the day the young lady who acted in "total good faith" to pay for the repairs of the car will get to hold onto her $1,800.

The other guys sold his car with no communication to the young lady or the panel beater of his intentions so he has voided any kind of agreement because the car is no longer in his possession, nor can he claim for any loss on the sale price because again, he never informed anyone of his decision, and because selling a used car is a negotiated sale there's no real way that the loss can be proved 100%

Than and the fact that he was bold enough to try to claim for the repair after the car was sold, he has no grounds.

My bet is that a magistrate would tell him to pull his head in and get lost.

As a safety I would try to get as much detail on the guy as possible in case he tries some payback afterwards.

If we're talking FNQ, it's a small town and most people know who the ratbags are.

Mik01 · « **Reply #42 on:** September 12, 2014, 07:33:55 PM »

Hi mate. Im not a lawyer, but am nearly finished law degree. This is not qualified legal advice, and I would advise that she sees a solicitor which should cost only a couple hundred dollars for an hour.
As Jet said, document everything first, and then sit down with them and talk it through.
My take on this is that the seller of the vehicle now needs to show that the 1800 was the value of his loss on the vehicle, or he suffered such loss through the disposal of the vehicle.

The original agreement is not capable of being performed as the thing is sold. The original contract was the repair of the vehicle to a value appraised by the panel beater, not the payment of cash equivalent to the owner. As the panel beater never performed the work, no payment is required.

I can dig through some precedents on similar matters and pm you some info. Without going into all of it here, if it were me in that situation I would be happy to go to court or small claims equivalent. But like anything, a lot will come down to what was discussed and agreed between the parties. Recommend dropping a carton or bottle to the panel beater for his honesty - if it goes to court, you will need him there to vouch for the details

Bill · « **Reply #43 on:** September 12, 2014, 07:35:44 PM »

As sure as Im typing this, if I was in Marys place I wouldnt give him anything.
And I also dont care who doesnt like it...
Bill

barneys · « **Reply #44 on:** September 12, 2014, 07:37:49 PM »

really she hit the car she should pay the money ,I think its the right thing to do ,

oldmate · « **Reply #45 on:** September 12, 2014, 07:40:37 PM »

Quote from: Mik01 on September 12, 2014, 07:33:55 PM

Hi mate. Im not a lawyer, but am nearly finished law degree. This is not qualified legal advice, and I would advise that she sees a solicitor which should cost only a couple hundred dollars for an hour.
As Jet said, document everything first, and then sit down with them and talk it through.
My take on this is that the seller of the vehicle now needs to show that the 1800 was the value of his loss on the vehicle, or he suffered such loss through the disposal of the vehicle.

The original agreement is not capable of being performed as the thing is sold. The original contract was the repair of the vehicle to a value appraised by the panel beater, not the payment of cash equivalent to the owner. As the panel beater never performed the work, no payment is required.

I can dig through some precedents on similar matters and pm you some info. Without going into all of it here, if it were me in that situation I would be happy to go to court or small claims equivalent. But like anything, a lot will come down to what was discussed and agreed between the parties. Recommend dropping a carton or bottle to the panel beater for his honesty - if it goes to court, you will need him there to vouch for the details

Yep agreed.

Make him spend the money to prove he lost $1800 on the sale of the vehicle..

scubasteve · « **Reply #46 on:** September 12, 2014, 08:07:34 PM »

Quote from: barneys on September 12, 2014, 07:37:49 PM

really she hit the car she should pay the money ,I think its the right thing to do ,

So you would be happy to pay for some thing that wasn't fixed?

CRW · « **Reply #47 on:** September 12, 2014, 08:08:50 PM »

So many Legal advices here by back yard Lawyers, don't risk it seek professional advice, do not ask for legal advice on here or Face book, proper advice will cost and you can feel confident with that advice, here or Face book can only lead to disaster

Cheers
Carl
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Patr80l · « **Reply #48 on:** September 12, 2014, 08:15:08 PM »

Quote from: oldmate on September 12, 2014, 07:40:37 PM

Yep agreed.

Make him spend the money to prove he lost $1800 on the sale of the vehicle..

No. A panel beater estimated the damage was $1,800 and she accepted liability for this.
It's none of her business what he does to his car and nothing to do with what he sold the car for.

oldmate · « **Reply #49 on:** September 12, 2014, 08:16:54 PM »

Quote from: scubasteve on September 12, 2014, 08:07:34 PM

So you would be happy to pay for some thing that wasn't fixed?

Bingo!

News:

Author Topic: legal question - advice - car accident (Read 21124 times)