Neighbor's child and another child threw rocks at our car and caused $1200 in damage. Parents agreed to pay for damages based on estimates from auto shops. One parent paid with a check made out to us, but neighbor made check out to one of the body shops, not to us. The car is owned outright by us so shouldn't the check be made out to us? If it was an insurance company paying, they would pay us directly, not the shop. We returned check to neighbor and asked that it be made out to us and she refuses to do so. Who is right?

The estimate was done at body shops. That doesn't mean any particular shop will do the repairs, or even that repairs will be done. The checks should be made out to you, and you will decide if you want to get the car repaired. Maybe you will use the checks toward a new car. The money is yours, not a body shop's.

You are correct. The decision of which shop to use, when to have it repaired, and indeed whether to get the car repaired at all, is strictly up to you. If the child caused $1000 in damage then you are "made whole" by receiving $1000, and you are under no obligation whether to spend that $1000 on repairing the car or on something else.

However, if in fact you are planning to get the car repaired I wouldn't push this too hard. In the interest of trying to keep things from getting nasty I would use the money to repair the car - so just tell them the name of the shop to make it out to. Otherwise if they refuse to make it out to you your recourse is small claims court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ebaines

You are correct. The decision of which shop to use, when to have it repaired, and indeed whether to get the car repaired at all, is strictly up to you. If the child caused $1000 in damage then you are "made whole" by receiving $1000, and you are under no obligation whether to spend that $1000 on repairing the car or on something else.

However, if in fact you are planning to get the car repaired I wouldn't push this too hard. In the interest of trying to keep things from getting nasty I would use the money to repair the car - so just tell them the name of the shop to make it out to. Otherwise if they refuse to make it out to you your recourse is small claims court.

---

All true. However the point-of-view of the parent who wrote the check to the body shop, can be guessed. I suppose they are suspcious that you got a friend at a body shop to write an inflated estimate. They want to avoid paying you a windfall. So, as Ebaines suggests, you might tell them to make it out to the shop which will be doing the repairs. And give them a copy of the estimate for that shop.

If, on the other hand, you don't intend to get the car fixed, tell them as much, explain that they owe it to you neverthess, and that if they don't agree a judge will.

Are you going to get it repaired ? If not it should be made out to you. If they don't pay, you can sue them in small claims.

I'd like to know the reason the question is being asked - trying to be difficult, not intending to get the vehicle repaired, Uncle Charlies wrote the estimate, something else. My recommendation? Same as many insurance companies do. Check written JOINTLY to owner and shop.

JudyKayTee, I was asking the question legitimately. Nothing shady here. We got real estimates from real shops and we do plan on having the car repaired. It's just that we may want to get it repaired somewhere else. We agreed with the neighbor that we would accept the amount of the lesser estimate. We may want to get it fixed at the higher price shop and pay the difference ourselves. Whatever the reason, she owes US the money for damages even if we never get the car fixed.

Also insurance companies only make out a joint check to the shop and the owner/driver if the car still has a lienholder (bank still has the title). This car is paid for and we own the car outright. Therefore if this were an insurance claim the check would be made out only to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovedale3

JudyKayTee, I was asking the question legitimately. Nothing shady here. We got real estimates from real shops and we do plan on having the car repaired. It's just that we may want to get it repaired somewhere else. We agreed with the neighbor that we would accept the amount of the lesser estimate. We may want to get it fixed at the higher price shop and pay the difference ourselves. Whatever the reason, she owes US the money for damages even if we never get the car fixed.

Also insurance companies only make out a joint check to the shop and the owner/driver if the car still has a lienholder (bank still has the title). This car is paid for and we own the car outright. Therefore if this were an insurance claim the check would be made out only to me.

---

I'm an accident/liability investigator. What I posted is how it works in my area. If this were an insurance claim the check would be made jointly payable - again, in my area.

I realize she owes you the money for damages. Rather than argue with her I "simply" would pick a shop and have her write a joint check.

Or you can squabble over it and eventually take her to Court, spending both (unnecessary) time and money.

As a matter of principle, yes, she owes you the money. Would I argue this point with her? No. I'd take the easy road. I see enough of these situations every day and wonder why it's an argument.

I would also add (and I don't know where you are) that a parent is not automatically responsible for vandalsim caused by his/her child.

We live in GA. My husband has been an insurance adjuster here in GA for over 15 years so we are well-versed in auto insurance here in the state. :)

Believe me, we have tried to take the easy road. We don't want to be "those people". The vandalism happened back at the beginning of November 2011. We were being lenient because we knew that it was Christmas and money may be tight. When she finally gave us the check made out to the body shop almost 2 months ago, she left it in our mailbox. My husband walked right over to her house and asked politely that she make the check out to us rather than the shop, and she gave the excuse that "she didn't have any more checks". My husband gave the check back to her. We have since called her and left notes for her asking about a check so that we can start repairs.

Since then, we sent her a certified letter asking once again for payment. She never picked it up from the post office so it was returned to us. We then gave her a copy of the letter and told her that the next communication would be coming from our local magistrate court. She gave no response. Therefore, I filed a claim against her this week, almost 5 months since the date of the vandalism.

The day after I filed the claim, she left a letter in our mailbox saying that she had paid us and she didn't want to be "harassed further about the matter". However, my husband gave the check back to her with VOID written across it so we have not been paid. It appears she has no intention of paying her half so we feel that court is our only option.

Also, her child that did the damage is nine years old. Since he is a minor, she is responsible.

I'm amazed that you asked the question if your husband has 15 years as an insurance adjuster. (I'm not an adjuster. I'm an investigator)

Your argument (obviously) is that the damage was willful, not accidental, and the mother is, therefore, responsible.

You had already filed in Small Claims when you asked this?

I must have misread it - I took it as a "who is right" moral question instead of a legal question. I think the answers are different - but the check already was returned to her so that option is moot.

I had not filed a claim when I asked this question. While my husband is an insurance adjuster and knew what to do, we wanted validation from the standpoint of someone who may have more knowledge with the "legal" side of the situation before we went any further in a court of law. We didn't want to hire a lawyer so I thought someone here could give us some advice/validation.

It would have helped if you had explained upfront the full story.

Bottom line is you had a right to ask for a check made out to you or, at least, a body shop you specified.

So if she can't produce a cancelled check then you win in court. But you will still need to collect. Winning in court will just give you the right to use legal means (garnishment etc.) to try and collect.

ScottGem, Sorry I wasn't clear when I first asked the question. I am brand new to this site and I was just trying to be succinct in my post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovedale3

We live in GA. ...
Also, her child that did the damage is nine years old. Since he is a minor, she is responsible.

---

"GEORGIA CODE
...
TITLE 51. TORTS
CHAPTER 2. IMPUTABLE NEGLIGENCE
O.C.G.A. § 51-2-3 (2011)

§ 51-2-3. Liability for malicious acts of minor child

(a) Every parent or guardian having the custody and control over a minor child or children under the age of 18 shall be liable in an amount not to exceed $10,000.00 plus court costs for the willful or malicious acts of the minor child or children resulting in reasonable medical expenses to another, damage to the property of another, or both reasonable medical expenses and damage to property.

(b) This Code section shall be cumulative and shall not be restrictive of any remedies now available to any person, firm, or corporation for injuries or damages arising out of the acts, torts, or negligence of a minor child under the "family-purpose car doctrine," any statute, or common law in force and effect in this state.

(c) The intent of the General Assembly in passing this Code section is to provide for the public welfare and aid in the control of juvenile delinquency, not to provide restorative compensation to victims of injurious or tortious conduct by children."

Thanks, AK - I was going to post my source but after I got the "not helpful" I pretty much lost interest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Thanks, AK - I was going to post my source but after I got the "not helpful" I pretty much lost interest.

---

{Mod Note: the Inaccurate rating was removed since the rater did not provide a reason for the rating-<>}

To Ilovedale3

The inaccurate rating is only to be used to correct erroneous, inaccurate or misleading information posted as a response. In the post that you rated, a question was asked and an opinion was expressed. No erroneous facts were posted. In addition, when rating a post as inaccurate the rules require an explanation. Please remember this in the future.