Who pays?

Mom, dad, baby (in stroller pushed by dad), dog (on leash held by mom). Dog breaks leash, runs into street, gets hit by a car. Car is not speeding, not driving recklessly, etc. Dog is badly injured. Car is damaged. Car owner wants insurance info (homeowners/renters) of the dog owners so that he can get his car fixed. Owners refuse, freak out at driver for daring to ask for such info after hitting their dog. Cop at scene tries to talk driver out of it 'because of the circumstances."

Who should pay for the damage to the car?

** note - this is an incident I witnessed earlier today **

A couple years ago one of my dog was hit by a car, my home owners had to pay for the damage.

It is the dog owners responsibility to keep the dog under control and out of the street.

Not an animal but ... I as recently backed into by another driver. Filed the claim and they "waived my deductible" ... BUT ... I had to pay the tax on the repairs AND on the rental vehicle. So someone backing into me cost me close to $500..

Dog owner pays. Driver had no fault in the accident.

Who would be paying if the kid ran into the street? Not really all that different. And who pays if it was a wild animal like a deer? Again not really all that different.

with a child technically the parents of the child because they are responsible for the control of the child. it can get complicated if it's at or near a intersection, because in a lot of states pedestrians have the right of way over cars. it can also complicate things because a child is injured so a lot of car owners step up and take care of things.

wild animals are covered thru comprehensive insurance because you can't bill mother nature for damages. no comp ins you are up the creek without a paddle.

When you ask this question on the internet (must be true ) this is the answer that comes up 99.9% of the time..........but for you I get the feeling it's not the correct answer



IMO it just means that the motorist has the right to sue the dog owner but the dog owner is not immediately responsible. With that as a hassle for the car/vehicle driver the driver will most likely just bite the bullet and figure out what's the least expensive way to repair the vehicle and move on. Pet and owners come out way worse off from the pet injury and trauma of the entire situation IMO.......the driver also in a way especially if they are pet lovers too. Life goes on.

Defective leash, bill manufacturer?

This a trick question?

Dogs aren't wild animals.

Dog owners pay is my guess as they are required to maintain control of the animal.

"Not my dog"...............................

I get this but why is it different because the dog has an owner? They are still animals with a mind of their own. It wasn't like the owners had intentionally let it run free. What if it was a stray dog?
The only difference is the owners may potentially have insurance that will cover the damages. Otherwise it's the drivers comprehensive insurance that will pay if he has it.

It's different because the dog has an owner who is responsible for keeping control of the dog. An adult pedestrian is also liable if they are crossing the street illegally, run into traffic, etc. and get hit. They are responsible for the damage caused to the vehicle. If it's a minor, there are statutory considerations that may prevent the parents from being held liable in some states, in some scenarios. Generally speaking, if a minor runs into traffic, rides their bike into traffic, etc., the parents will be held liable for damage done to the car if the minor is struck.

The reaction of the parents, and of the crowd of onlookers who witnessed this, indicated that a lot of people though that the poor guy driving the car should've just sucked it up and eaten the cost, and that he was an a-hole for not doing so.

Bet the vet bill, if they can even save the pet, is more than the vehicle damage and I bet in order for the driver to get any compensation he has to retain an attorney and sue the pet owners. Where does it state that one has to give more than name and contact information in a situation like this? Who carries their home owner's insurance information with them or even their auto insurance info when they are walking? Once again "Not My Dog" Wonder if there will be a counter suit and an investigation of the vehicle driver and his vehicle to make sure the driver was doing the speed limit and not a mile or two over and that the vehicle was is safe operating condition...........and I hope he doesn't have one of those "safe driver" devices that comes back to "bite" him

I gave a statement to the police. The other driver wasn't speeding (neither was I), wasn't doing anything unsafe. As they crossed the street, I could see the dog jerking at the leash, generally acting like a spaz. As the car in front of me approached the corner, the dog jerked again and the leash broke. No way for the driver to avoid hitting the dog.

Your original post read and now you state ? Were they also crossing the street illegally or did they have the "pedestrian" right of way?

They crossed the street in a crosswalk as we were approaching the intersection. That was when I noticed the dog behaving like a spaz. They stepped up onto the curb, and took maybe 3-4 steps down the sidewalk, facing toward us. As the car in front of me was just about even with them, the dog broke loose.

Originally Posted by Mr T2U

with a child technically the parents of the child because they are responsible for the control of the child. it can get complicated if it's at or near a intersection, because in a lot of states pedestrians have the right of way over cars. it can also complicate things because a child is injured so a lot of car owners step up and take care of things.

wild animals are covered thru comprehensive insurance because you can't bill mother nature for damages. no comp ins you are up the creek without a paddle.

Pedestrians have the right of way While in a Cross walk not anywhere on the street, "Owned" animals and their actions are the responsibility of the owners, These are Laws not opinion or conjecture. If a Owned animal (Dog/Cat/Cow/Horse) gets hit by a vehicle while on a public thoroughfare, it is the drivers responsibility to report it (police/owners), and any damages incurred are the responsibility of the "Owner"
Wild critters are an act of God...

Exactly. Civil matter, but it's the owner's responsibility to have control of the dog at all times. Should have had a better, newer leash is the bottom line. If car owner's insurance doesn't pay, sue dog owner.

Remember, this is the NEW America. NEVER take responsibility for anything. Blame the leash, it was defective. Blame the sidewalk if you can. It had big crack, and dog had to leave it to walk.

I would have followed the dog owner until I got their information, if there was enough damage to my vehicle to be concerned. I feel bad their dog was injured, but they could say "I'm sorry this happened, here's our name and phone number, and we are rushing to the vet now".

as i posted it can get complicated AT OR NEAR A INTERSECTION.
i used those words because a lot of judges and juries will consider this a cross walk.


as others posted and suggested, billing and actually getting paid for damages are 2 different things.

I get that it's the law, it just seems to be a double standard only because the animal is owned. If it was allowed to run free I get that also but the dog was leashed. Stuff happens, things break, you get the picture. Animals can be unpredictable whether they are owned or not. Nature of the beast.

In my state the dog owners responsible. Paid a few of these as a Homeowners Rep.

Who pays if you are walking down the sidewalk and a chained dog breaks it's chain and rips you a new one?

How would that be different?

What if it was a bear that came out of the woods and ripped you a new one instead? Who pays there?

How is that different?

When you take ownership of an animal you also take responsibility for it's actions.

Here dog owner is responsible. Dog must be under control at all time. Even if the dog was on a leash still when it hit car owner still at fault because even on the leash the dog wasn't under control.

Right. I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Nobody is stating it was a malicious act on the part of the dog owner. However, the dog did in fact go off leash and out of the control of the owner, period. It was an accident, and they do happen, but the dog owner is responsible. It was NOT an act of God, or Mother Nature. It also was not a person at a cross walk. Dogs are shorter, harder to see, and not a pedestrian. Dog "ran into the street". Yes, a jury found OJ innocent, so anything COULD happen. Martians could land on Earth tomorrow..

When my dog got hit it didn't really hurt him but it did enough damage to total the old Lincoln that hit him. I live in a rural area and our dogs are only in a pen at night or when we're gone, he followed another dog into the road and was hit simple as that. Since he's my dog he is also my responsibility. I contacted my insurance company and explained the deal to them, they took care of it.

The woman that hit him has several hundred acres and some high bred registered cattle. I asked her if I came by her house and one of her cows was in the road and I hit it would she know who it belonged to? When she didn't answer I said unless it had a tattoo in its lip my guess is that no one would claim it. She just walked off.

"Dog broke leash" ?

I know when I'm driving a car, and see a pedestrian/child/dog near my pathway, I know that all can be unpredictable, for reasons unforeseeable by me, and if they enter my path, the outcome can be injurious and/or fatal. I also know blame can easily be directed towards the driver. By taking extra obvious preventive measures on my part, like slowing down, giving a warning horn beep, pre braking, moving over and farther away, etc or some or any combination, I can make an obvious case that I was pro actively safety conscious, took extra caution if things went south, and mainly helped prevent a bad outcome. Legally however ,I may not be obligated to do any of the above. "Accidents" do happen, and some are avoidable, if one makes the effort.

Dog broke leash, correct. Should have had a newer leash, stronger leash, better leash, whatever. If they want to go after the leash manufacturer later, fine. It is NOT up to the vehicle owner to do so, if indeed the dog owner want's to make that claim! Hey, maybe the driver can go on SSI now for PTSD.

And law does not require vehicle operator to slow down when someone is walking their dog. And while it would've been great if the driver had anticipated the breaking of the leash, and slowed down just in case, he was certainly under no legal or moral obligation. My God, when will people take responsibility?! It would be different if children were playing in the street, for example. It seems nobody can take responsibility anymore. It's always the fault of someone or something else. Always. This is why we have so many attorneys in America and our premiums continue to rise.

"Dog broke leash, correct. Should have had a newer leash, stronger leash, better leash, whatever. If they want to go after the leash manufacturer later, fine. It is NOT up to the vehicle owner to do so, if indeed the dog owner want's to make that claim! Hey, maybe the driver can go on SSI now for PTSD. I agree, the range of options are nearly unlimited.

And law does not require vehicle operator to slow down when someone is walking their dog. I did state that, Right? And while it would've been great I would use the word prudent if the driver had anticipated the breaking of the leash If they only had thought that that, it would IMO show a real lack of imagination, ,my suggestions anticipated a much wider selection of possibilities , and slowed down just in case, he was certainly under no legal or moral obligation. So an easy solution, but accept no responsibility for taking that extra caution, which dovetails IMO nicely with your next comment My God, when will people take responsibility?! It would be different if children were playing in the street, you mean its perfectly logical and predictable how kids clear the street when a car approaches? for example. It seems nobody can take responsibility anymore. It's always the fault of someone or something else. Always. This is why we have so many attorneys in America and our premiums continue to rise." So juries made up of simple minded easily swayed people have no part in this then?

Mike what would you estimate the damage to the driver's car?

Probably $1,500 - $1,800, depending upon the price of the headlamp.

Yikes! that puts a big twist on this....................what vehicle?

Ford Fusion. I checked, and the halogen headlamp itself is almost $800, which is more than I realized. I wrote a quick estimate, and it was $2,300.

Dog owners fault they should fork over the information and be expected to pay.
Had it been a wreckless driver or something they could have easily avoided then I wouldn't want to give anything to the driver either.

Absolutely! It would be different if the guy ran up on the sidewalk and hit the dog.

Easy to say when it's not your car that has the dog dent in it...

Kevin

Gotta take emotion out of it and go with what is right - dog owner is responsible for damage.
When our horses got out and made their way through the neighbors yard our homeowners covered for landscaping crew to come out.

Wow. Just take the report, pal. He gave them a break by not citing the dog owners for failing to control their pet - I'm sure it's in the muni code. No reason to try and pressure the guy with the car damage to let it go.