Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see
who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk.
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners
risk.
Does that matter?
If a friend parks on my driveway and the car is damaged by someone who
is not a member of this household, am *I* obliged to pay for repairs,
with or without an "...at owner's risk" sign?
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
The offer made by the school sounds ex-gratia.
Would signage such as you mention oblige the school to pay? Even if
(say) a third party had thrown the missile, perhaps from outside the
school premises?
Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see
who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk.
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see
who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk.
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
Regards
Stephen
On 4/30/25 16:00, JNugent wrote:
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners
risk.
Does that matter?
I would guess a car park next to a cricket pitch should warn people
against the risk of a cricket ball.
Perhaps a school could reasonably
reduce their liability by warning of naughty children.
If a friend parks on my driveway and the car is damaged by someone who
is not a member of this household, am *I* obliged to pay for repairs,
with or without an "...at owner's risk" sign?
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
The offer made by the school sounds ex-gratia.
Would signage such as you mention oblige the school to pay? Even if
(say) a third party had thrown the missile, perhaps from outside the
school premises?
Perhaps the balance of probability suggests the stone was thrown by a
pupil, under the care of the school
On 30/04/2025 14:10, stephen.hull@btinternet.com wrote:
Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has
dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see
who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
Who refused to pay? The school or the school' insurers? Who are the
school's insurers? is this in writing, from who?
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk. >>
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
Isn't this down to balance of probabilities? A history of stones being
thrown would put this in the proven category?
The school, as your employer, a duty of care towards your possessions. A >history of not confronting the issue could be viewed as negligent.
BICBW
On 30/04/2025 14:10, stephen.hull@btinternet.com wrote:
Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has
dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see
who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk. >>
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
Regards
Stephen
It is doubtful whether the school would be liable based only on the >information you have given. The school's insurers would indemnify the
school against its legal liability and would not have any obligation to
pay up unless the school was liable.
If you can successfully argue that the staff of the school knew or ought
to have known that stones were being thrown at cars, and failed to
supervise the children and stop them throwing stones, then it is
possible that the school would be liable and therefore that its insurers >would pay up (but it is immaterial from your point of view which of them
pays up).
A sign saying that cars are parked at owners risk is of no relevance.
Wouldn't you claim from your own car insurance and suggest to them that
they claim reimbursement from the school, suing the school if necessary?
Of course, the sum involved might be too small to justify doing that.
If the school can identify the child who threw the stone you could
pursue a claim against that child or, perhaps with more success,
threaten to report it to the police as criminal damage if the child or
his parents do not pay for the repairs. If the head teacher tells you
"please don't involve the police" I think you can and should ignore that >request. But perhaps seek advice from your union to see if they would
back you if you were disciplined for ignoring that request.
The school may not have footage showing how your car was dented but it
is unlikely that it would have been dented in any other way so I think a >court would believe you.
On 30/04/2025 17:14, Pancho wrote:
On 4/30/25 16:00, JNugent wrote:
Perhaps the balance of probability suggests the stone was thrown by a
pupil, under the care of the school
I would suggest that is the case. However is the school responsible for >damage caused by children in loco parentis?
On 30/04/2025 02:10 PM, stephen.hull@btinternet.com wrote:
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk.
Does that matter?
If a friend parks on my driveway and the car is damaged by someone who
is not a member of this household, am *I* obliged to pay for repairs,
with or without an "...at owner's risk" sign?
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
The offer made by the school sounds ex-gratia.
Would signage such as you mention oblige the school to pay? Even if
(say) a third party had thrown the missile, perhaps from outside the
school premises?
On 4/30/25 16:00, JNugent wrote:
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners
risk.
Does that matter?
Would signage such as you mention oblige the school to pay? Even if
(say) a third party had thrown the missile, perhaps from outside the
school premises?
Perhaps the balance of probability suggests the stone was thrown by a
pupil, under the care of the school
In message <m7f45aFrtgpU1@mid.individual.net>
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
On 30/04/2025 14:10, stephen.hull@btinternet.com wrote:It looks to me that it may be too difficult to pursue this if they don't
Question?
I work in a primary school and certain pupils in the playground have
been throwing stones at staff cars in the school car park, one stone has >>> dented the roof of a car which was witnessed by a member of staff and
the school are prepared to pay for the damage on this car through the
schools insurance. However my car bonnet has also been damaged by a
stone albeit at an earlier time but because the school office cannot see >>> who threw the stone that hit my car via their cctv they have refused to
pay.
There are no signs anywhere on site to say cars are parked at owners risk. >>>
I have dash cam footage of my car entering the car park at 6.45 am with
no damage on the bonnet, but at 11.15 am when leaving site you can see
the damage to bonnet on the dash cam.
Is the school liable to pay as there is no signage displayed?
Regards
Stephen
It is doubtful whether the school would be liable based only on the
information you have given. The school's insurers would indemnify the
school against its legal liability and would not have any obligation to
pay up unless the school was liable.
If you can successfully argue that the staff of the school knew or ought
to have known that stones were being thrown at cars, and failed to
supervise the children and stop them throwing stones, then it is
possible that the school would be liable and therefore that its insurers
would pay up (but it is immaterial from your point of view which of them
pays up).
A sign saying that cars are parked at owners risk is of no relevance.
Wouldn't you claim from your own car insurance and suggest to them that
they claim reimbursement from the school, suing the school if necessary?
Of course, the sum involved might be too small to justify doing that.
If the school can identify the child who threw the stone you could
pursue a claim against that child or, perhaps with more success,
threaten to report it to the police as criminal damage if the child or
his parents do not pay for the repairs. If the head teacher tells you
"please don't involve the police" I think you can and should ignore that
request. But perhaps seek advice from your union to see if they would
back you if you were disciplined for ignoring that request.
The school may not have footage showing how your car was dented but it
is unlikely that it would have been dented in any other way so I think a
court would believe you.
have any obligation to pay then I'll have no real choice but to pay
myself which isn't the outcome I wanted.
Thanks for all the replies anyway.
Regards
Stephen
It looks to me that it may be too difficult to pursue this if they don't
have any obligation to pay then I'll have no real choice but to pay
myself which isn't the outcome I wanted.
Thanks for all the replies anyway.
Regards
Stephen
It depends on how far you want to push this.
Do you have any reason to believe that staff were aware of stones being >thrown and did nothing to stop it?
If it was on CCTV, was anyone monitoring the CCTV at the time?
You could write a letter of claim, in which you say that the staff knew
or ought to have known that children were throwing stones but failed to >prevent it or to supervise the children. The letter of claim should be
sent to whoever deals with liability claims, probably not the head
teacher, more likely the Insurance Officer at the council if it is a
school that is controlled by the local council.
They would then be under an obligation to acknowledge your claim and
give a substantive response within a reasonable time, saying why they
are not liable if they are in fact denying liability.
In message <m7keikFne5gU1@mid.individual.net>
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
It looks to me that it may be too difficult to pursue this if they don't >>> have any obligation to pay then I'll have no real choice but to pay
myself which isn't the outcome I wanted.
Thanks for all the replies anyway.
Regards
Stephen
It depends on how far you want to push this.
Do you have any reason to believe that staff were aware of stones being
thrown and did nothing to stop it?
I don't think that staff where aware until a car was damaged and seen by
a teacher.
If it was on CCTV, was anyone monitoring the CCTV at the time?
The deputy head has viewed cctv (which does cover the area) but he has
said he could see anyone throwing stones at that time, this was at early morning brake about 10.15 when presumably my car was damaged.
You could write a letter of claim, in which you say that the staff knew
or ought to have known that children were throwing stones but failed to
prevent it or to supervise the children. The letter of claim should be
sent to whoever deals with liability claims, probably not the head
teacher, more likely the Insurance Officer at the council if it is a
school that is controlled by the local council.
The insurance company who I don't know the name of are being difficult according to the school business manager over the car that was witnessed being damaged, so I have little chance of a claim.
I don't know if it makes any difference but the primary school is
Catholic and run by the Diocese of Shrewsbury so not in council control.
They would then be under an obligation to acknowledge your claim and
give a substantive response within a reasonable time, saying why they
are not liable if they are in fact denying liability.
The school are still waiting to hear from their insurers to see if they
are liable or not.
I might find this out this week.
Regards
Steve
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 38:33:48 |
| Calls: | 9,798 |
| Files: | 13,751 |
| Messages: | 6,189,398 |