Tree Fell On Car.

[Theland1]

About a month ago, during high winds, a tree was blown down and fell on to my sons' car, witnessed by two policemen following close behind.
No injuries, but some damage to the car.
My son has tried to claim against the council, but their solicitors have written to him, asking him to prove negligence on the part of the council.
Aren't the council supposed to inspect the highways for safety?
Any other information would be most welcome.
Thank you in advance.

[sarah_louise]

The owner and/or occupier of land upon
which trees stand is generally liable for any
loss or damage resulting from falling
branches or from the falling of the tree itself.
Any tree that is situated in the highway is the responsibility of the Council.
Highway trees are subject to routine inspection by the council.

Consult a Solicitor.

[stonekicker]

i think what the council may also be trying to point out is that it was due to the high winds that the tree fell onto the car, maybe not negligence. my advice would also be to see a solicitor and pursue the negligence route, but not to be surprised if it isn't proven or considered within the insurance claim. can't you pass the hassle onto the insurance company - surely that's what they are there for?

[Ethel]

Yes, there has to be negligence on the part of the council.

The fact that a tree growing on council owned land fell over and damaged your son's car is not enough.

The council must have been negligent in some way - if the tree was diseased making it susceptible to falling in high wind and they did nothing to prevent it, for example.

Not only that, the council has to KNOW the tree was in a perilous state and did nothing; and it must be reasonable for them to have known.

If they can show the tree was perfectly healthy and nobody would have foreseen the tree falling in high wind they will not be liable.

Similarly, if they can show the tree was vandalised in recent hours before the winds, they will not be liable unless it can be proved they were informed of the fact and chose to do nothing.

[Twenty20]

Isn't this what he's paying insurance for, when something like this happens? Or didnt he have insurance?

[Tichfield]

You would have to hace comprehensive insurance to be covered. The law only requires a driver to have third party liability insurance.

So maybe he is not covered for that damage by the insurance policy.

[cassa333]

As said before consult a solicitor it is the first reaction to (all) claims and get the surrounding trees looked at. Get a statement from the police as well.

If they knew a tree were dangerious or not isn't an issue. It is their tree they should have systems in place to check them.

If the tree roots where not deep enough, they weren't looking after the tree properly therefore are liable. How old is the tree? has any groundworks been done in the area resently? etc

However if it was just bad luck it fell down then I would say you will have to claim from your insurance.

[naomi24]

Why aren't your insurers sorting it out?

[Whickerman]

The insurers should be tackling this with the council, as Naomi's said. However, i seem to remember a glut of claims re trampolines in high winds a few years back - a load of cars were damaged over a particular period by 'flying' trampolines that weren't properly anchored. The result was that the car insurance companies paid out, rather than the house insurance companies, because it was an unforeseen event (act of god, they used to call it). I can see your son will be facing the same difficulty, but it really should be his insurers that are fighting for him- that's what he pays fees for...

Hope he's ok btw, that must've been a shock

[Theland1]

Wouldn't he lose his "No Claims Bonus" if he claimed on his comprehensive policy?

[Ice.Maiden]

I personally think he might Theland, but if he gets the damage put right - that's what insurance companies are there for, otherwise you just pay forever, for nothing.
Some years ago, my brother was driving in high winds, and a hedge stake uprooted and shot through his windscreen. His passenger had half of her cheek taken off - terrible. It ended up with the insurance paying, not the Council.

[jelly baby]

Doubt that he would lose all his no claims, possibly around 20%. Maybe he should consider no-claims protection when he renews.

[Theland1]

Thank you all for your help.
Icey - that's horrific.

[cassa333]

That's true ice... the insurance company then get the money back from the council... eventualy if they bother.