What would Motors do about a trolley ding?
- Thread starter Django x2
- Start date
No, and I said at the start that this was important. OP seems reluctant to put up a photo of the damage.
That's insane.
I think you should pay to put it right, but by that I mean a few hundred quid for a good smart repair or to cover insurance excess etc.
£1500 is ridiculous.
To be honest, if it was my car and a small trolley dent, I would rather have the smart repair than risk Audi respraying the whole side of the car and taking everything apart. That's just asking for even more hassle as they will inevitably do a **** job the first time round.
I think you should pay to put it right, but by that I mean a few hundred quid for a good smart repair or to cover insurance excess etc.
£1500 is ridiculous.
To be honest, if it was my car and a small trolley dent, I would rather have the smart repair than risk Audi respraying the whole side of the car and taking everything apart. That's just asking for even more hassle as they will inevitably do a **** job the first time round.
I'm surprised they didn't include engine replacement as a result of the G-Force damage caused by the trolley.
I'd just ask her to get a quote from a mobile repair service and it shouldn't cost more than £150 at most, or send a picture to some of them and get a quote and arrange it on her behalf.
I'd just ask her to get a quote from a mobile repair service and it shouldn't cost more than £150 at most, or send a picture to some of them and get a quote and arrange it on her behalf.
I THINK, you allowed a 4 year old to return a trolley and it hit someones car? If so, then wtf were you thinking to start with? 4 year old? That is an accident waiting to happen (and it did).
As the kid is 4 year old, he/she has no legal recourse, so you are well within your rights to not pay a thing.
As the quote is for £1500, i would not be paying anywhere near that anyway, but i would offer to pay her excess (around £250 max), but again, there is no legal requirement to do so and is purely my own opinion.
As the kid is 4 year old, he/she has no legal recourse, so you are well within your rights to not pay a thing.
As the quote is for £1500, i would not be paying anywhere near that anyway, but i would offer to pay her excess (around £250 max), but again, there is no legal requirement to do so and is purely my own opinion.
It’s bonded comes from the outside?
Still there’s no need to remove the window just clever masking
I've never taken one out so I'm not certain what's involved. I'm guessing you have so apologies if I'm mistaken. Some trims are so tight around windows that the glass companies ask us to remove them so that they don't get damaged. I was basing my assumption on that.
And yes, masking may be the sensible way to do it, but as I mentioned, a quote like this will have every kind of add on possible. They can claim extra time and money for removing the window (whether they actually do it or not!) so it's pretty standard practice to put it onto a quote like this.
It's been a while since I worked in an insurance shop, I do in-house work for a car supermarket chain now, but the guys I keep in touch with say insurance companies are getting tighter and tighter, so they'll go heavy on any quote, even if it starts out as a retail job, just in case an assessor gets involved and starts lopping time off wherever he can.
Can we be clear here, the boy did the damage, not the adult. The claim would be against a minor, this will not go anywhere.
What would i personally do? I would offer to pay a token amount for a paintless repair, out of moral obligation. If this were rejected then i would change my tone, and tell them to pursue my 5 year old (not me) legally if they so wish. This wont go anywhere.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 3,685
Already mentioned earlier in the thread it’s not guaranteed the parent can’t be held liable for the child’s actions.
Very very unlikely that it would go anywhere and even less likely that they'd actually bother, with the very slim chance of proving beyond doubt that the parent was negligent. In all reality, their claim would stand absolutely no chance.
As i say, i would offer as a moral obligation a token amount for a paintless repair, but would not get involved any further than that. A lot of people wouldnt even go as far as that as demonstrated by the people saying to job on in this thread.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 3,685
I do find the people saying they would tell them to jog on amusing. If a 4 year rammed a trolley into their car I bet they wouldn’t be happy with that response from the parent.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 1,854
Send her to this guy 
Precisely, every person in this forum would be livid. Seriously though - 4 year old to put the trolley away, talk about brain dead.
I think you have misunderstood the thread. It is very doubtful that a 4 year old has any form of public liability insurance active (
), therefore people are referring to her comprehensive cover against which her excess is payable.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 1,439
Agreed, if it was my car I wouldnt want a "chips away" guy blobing some filler in it then wafting over with arattle can. Ideally you want it as perfect as before.
Ok, new scenario. 4 year old goes full ******* and manages to **** the trolley into 20 cars, everyone has to suck it up and fix their own car? parent can shrug shoulders and drive off.
^ pretty much. Google the issue. I did (in some detail) as i was interested, having a 5 year old myself. It is a huge issue in rough areas and the police are fairly powerless. Over the age of 10 the youth justice system kicks in, but again, good luck trying to claim compensation from a 10 year old, especially one brought up in a bad neighbourhood.