[Tipper16]

A child left their bicycle on my driveway and I ran over it with my car by accident. The father of the child thinks I should pay for the damages. Since the bicycle was left on my private property, I refused.
What does the law say?:confused:

[ScottGem]

Was the child visiting you?

Frankly, I think you would lose in court no matter what. A prudent person would look behind their car before backing out of a driveway. And negligence is based on what a prudent person would do. At best I think you would share in liability. So I would offer to pay half the cost of repairs.

[JudyKayTee]

You will lose if you go to Court. Private property or not the operator of the vehicle has a legal responsibility to check that the "path" is clear before proceeding.

Of course, if I were the parent I'd be grateful you didn't back over the bicycle AND my child.

[Tipper16]

JKT:
There was no need for the snarky response. Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

[Alty]

JKT:
There was no need for the snarky response. Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

Whoa, calm down. The fact is you didn't look before you backed up, this could have been a lot worse then it was. Thank goodness you only ran over a bike and not a child, that's what Judy was trying to say.

Offer to pay half, see if the parent agrees.

Besides, kids bikes aren't that expensive, many places sell them for less then $100 new, why go to court for that?

[ScottGem]

JKT:
There was no need for the snarky response. Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

Correct, they don't fall into the same category. But the fact is you didn't check otherwise you would have seen the bike. So it could have been any number of things back there that you could have hit.

[JudyKayTee]

JKT:
There was no need for the snarky response. Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

I'm an accident investigator - you didn't look before you backed up. You could have run over anything/anyone.

I'm snarky; you're defensive and careless.

Case closed from my side.

[twinkiedooter]

JKT:
There was no need for the snarky response. Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

Quite frankly, Tipper, hitting a child and hitting a bicycle do fall under the same category. 9 times out of 10 the bicycle has a kid seated on it. Many parents unwittingly and tragically back over their own children sitting on tricycles or bicycles behind their cars. Basically it is the driver's responsibility to look around his car before getting in it and driving off. Any reasonable person will check around his car - even if it's only a quick glance to see that they have all 4 tires properly inflated before getting in the driver's seat. A prudent driver would have noticed the bike behind the car.

Judy was only pointing out the fact you should be glad it was just a bike and not a child that was run over.

[Fr_Chuck]

Buy the kid a new bike, or you will pay court costs and a bike

[AK lawyer]

JKT:
... Hitting a child and hitting a bicycle hardly fall in the same category.

The negligence is exactly the same.

The damages are very differently; in this case trivial, compared to what they could have been, thank God.

Pay for a new bike with thanksgiving.