Car damage on private property

mayoman1973

At my workplace ( which I assume can be described as private property shared between our company and several others but all buildings owned by same landlord ) the landlord in his wisdom decided to install gates for access control. In the middle of the road he had his guys stick a 2" steel knob up out of the tar, purpose of which was to hold the gates in place. Perfect to blow out a tyre if you hit it on your wheel as almost impossible to see.
So 2 weeks ago he had it taken out. Wised up I thought. How wrong I was. Now in its place is a steel knob twice as high. Only a matter of time before some one wrecks their wheel or steering on it as a wheel would barely get over this. Question is if and when someone hits this who is responsible for the damage it will most definitely cause?

bladespin

I'd imagine the driver would be responsible as it's a static object they should see, also I'd bet there's an 'at your own risk' disclaimer as on most car parks.

Fogmatic

Sounds like one for the legal forum (contract law)? (The stories of these things are full of 'but's).

Del2005

Fogmatic wrote: »

Sounds like one for the legal forum (contract law)?

Legal forum will say contact a solicitor and won't offer any advice.

Del2005

bladespin wrote: »

I'd imagine the driver would be responsible as it's a static object they should see, also I'd bet there's an 'at your own risk' disclaimer as on most car parks.

Them signs are worthless as you can't contract yourself out of your rights and you always have a right to compensation if something happens to your property on someone else's property.

You can't but an obstruction on the road that could cause harm/damage and a motorbike hitting it could result in both.

bladespin

Del2005 wrote: »

Them signs are worthless as you can't contract yourself out of your rights and you always have a right to compensation if something happens to your property on someone else's property.

You can't but an obstruction on the road that could cause harm/damage and a motorbike hitting it could result in both.

It's not a road though, it's a carpark, not disagreeing but you could argue tha same for a speed bump, too fast on a bike and you could drop it, best of luck claiming on that one.

mayoman1973

Its in the middle of the road on the way into the carpark, just off the public road. It is a 10mm bar of steel sticking up in an inverted U shape. Height is approx 100mm off the road surface and width about 50mm. In an argument between that and a car wheel there will only be one winner. To say it is visible would be stretching it a bit as you are looking at a 10mm wide profile of the steel bar

Del2005

bladespin wrote: »

It's not a road though, it's a carpark, not disagreeing but you could argue tha same for a speed bump, too fast on a bike and you could drop it, best of luck claiming on that one.

Once the public have access its considered a road. Hitting a speed ramp is different to hitting a small solid object in the middle of the road, as most people can see and react to the speed ramp. But with our litigious nature a company would be crazy to leave the obstruction in the middle of the entrance. It's dangerous to both people and the environment if someone cracks a sump on it.

ohnonotgmail

So the object is 4 inches high and presumably does not have sharp edges. How fast are you driving through the gates that it would cause you to blow out a tire?

Whatwicklow

Remove cars and damages tyres / suspension from the discussion and insert pedestrians and trips..

I know I wouldn't be leaving a trip hazard for someone to fall into a gold mine on a car park I own.

mayoman1973

I know its there so I won't hit it but any driver that hits this thing at wrong angle is going to at very min damage a tyre or rim. If it were a 4" brick then that would be less of a problem as your wheel will just driver over it as weight is spread over full width of tyre. This thing is right where you have your steering turned and so exposes the wall of your tyre/rim to be lacerated or kinked. I must take a pic of this thing.

Seth Brundle

Do cyclists and/or pedestrians also use the entrance? Could one of them trip or catch against it resulting in a fall and injury?

grogi

bladespin wrote: »

I'd imagine the driver would be responsible as it's a static object they should see, also I'd bet there's an 'at your own risk' disclaimer as on most car parks.

You're joking.

The property owner and his agents have an obligation to the visitors of the property to maintain the property in the reasonable and safe condition. A speed bump, a barrier, a pillar etc. can all be expected by a reasonable person in a car park. An obstruction like the one OP mentioned is not something that can be reasonably expected on a property like that.

bladespin

grogi wrote: »

You're joking.

The property owner and his agents have an obligation to the visitors of the property to maintain the property in the reasonable and safe condition. A speed bump, a barrier, a pillar etc. can all be expected by a reasonable person in a car park. An obstruction like the one OP mentioned is not something that can be reasonably expected on a property like that.

Not joking, but I'm not an expert either, I'd be pretty p'd off if I damaged my car on it but wouldn't be holding my breath for compensation etiher.

If OP has already noticed and seen the item well enough to describe it in detail then it's hardly invisible.

A pic would be a great help though.

grogi

bladespin wrote: »

Not joking

It was a rhetorical question...

bladespin wrote: »

but I'm not an expert either, I'd be pretty p'd off if I damaged my car on it but wouldn't be holding my breath for compensation etiher.

By that logic they could leave an opened sewer entrance and should anyone fall inside claim that 'they should have seen it'. It doesn't work like that.

If that's something permanent, the land lord should at least make an effort to ensure nobody is going to incur damage.

bladespin

grogi wrote: »

It was a rhetorical question...



By that logic they could leave an opened sewer entrance and should anyone fall inside claim that 'they should have seen it'. It doesn't work like that.

Some difference between an open sewer and a gate stop where a gate would, well, stop. I see your point and I'm not arguing the contrary just saying that there's usually some get-out.

AlanG

Property owners have a duty of care. There would definitely be a case but it would be up to a judge to decide what is reasonable care by both sides.

The best thing you can do is mail the landlord pointing out the hazard and keep a record of the mail, it will strengthen any future case considerably.

ShadowHearth

Whatwicklow wrote: »

Remove cars and damages tyres / suspension from the discussion and insert pedestrians and trips..

I know I wouldn't be leaving a trip hazard for someone to fall into a gold mine on a car park I own.

I have to say, the system and laws are totally fecked up.

So when you driving ( less visibility, greater speed to react ) and you hit that hazzard: its your own fault, static object, you should have seen it.
But when you walking ( a lot more visibility, traveling at lower speed and clearly a lot more time to notice and avoid ) and hit that hazzard: its properly owners fault and now you can make a nice chunk of cash.

So damn stupid.

Fogmatic

Del2005 wrote: »

Fogmatic wrote: »

Sounds like one for the legal forum (contract law)?

Legal forum will say contact a solicitor and won't offer any advice.

No - I suppose it is beyond any simple universal answer. And any case like this could have twists & turns re liability that aren't obvious to a non lawyer.

I don't know if the Irish law is the same, but when my husband and I were in the building game in the UK, if someone broke into one of our building sites (even a thief), we'd still have had a duty of care re safety.

Maybe the OP should remind the owner about the litigious society, and suggest they have a word with their own solicitor about their labilities to drivers, pedestrians and emergency services, and see if anything happens? (I'd imagine security gates don't come cheap anyway, and a quick legal talk wouldn't make much difference).

Del2005

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I have to say, the system and laws are totally fecked up.

So when you driving ( less visibility, greater speed to react ) and you hit that hazzard: its your own fault, static object, you should have seen it.
But when you walking ( a lot more visibility, traveling at lower speed and clearly a lot more time to notice and avoid ) and hit that hazzard: its properly owners fault and now you can make a nice chunk of cash.

So damn stupid.

You can claim for damages if you are walking, crawling, driving, cycling, flying etc. If someone is negligent you will be compensated. Similar to the people who put rocks outside their home, if you hit the rock the home owner is liable for the damage.

Gravelly

Go down to the local halting site and tell them it's there, and it's a trip hazard. There'll be 47 claims in that evening, and it'll be gone by the end of the week.

Fogmatic

And/or maybe ask someone in the local fire service etc if they can still get in without damage? (Though I don't know if there's another entrance?)

robtri

a couple of pictures would be helpful...