I was involved in a car crash on Wednesday, during a sit.
I am ok, unhurt.
I happened to say to the other driver, who pulled out from parking on left without checking road was clear, and hit me, I just wanted my car safely off the road (now undriveable) as I needed to get back to the dogs I was here to sit.
In a later text he told me that I am not insured as I am working. I think he is clutching at straws as the photos clearly show he drove into me when I was on the main road. Perhaps he didnât want me to make a claim against him?
He is wrong, I am not working, he doesnât know this arrangement is accommodation in return for pet care. My insurance is fully comprehensive for social domestic and pleasure
However, for those of you who do also do paid sits, it is something to bear in mind. Different insurance may be required if using your car to travel to work.
Sorry to hear this news and what a nuisance. Hopefully your insurer will pay out as no fault of yours. Also, you werenât âworkingâ if the dogs werenât in your car. With hindsight it would have been best not to mention the dogs, but hindsight is always marvellous!
I suggest that you block the other driver from either texting or calling you. Or, ask the other party to go through their insurers for all communication. Do you have a dashcam, these can be invaluable for deciding claims? Were there any cameras on the street where the accident happened? I was once pranged in a carpark, the other driver tried blaming me. I obtained footage from the car park management and it showed the other driver was looking at their phone. Any witnesses?
We were only texting to get his full name and car reg. and for me to give him my insurance details, as I didnât have them to hand.
it is being dealt with through both insurers.
2 possible witness just drove off, the driver of parked van he pulled out from in front of, and the woman driving towards me who âflashed for him to come outâ, his words, in text, the very fact he mentions this could go against him, as that proves he didnât fully make his own decision.
He said she didnât want to get involved (so he must have spoken to her?)
I am not surprised she didnât, as she might feel a tad guilty..
I went back to the scene yâday and enquired in a shop which had CCTV but it didnât cover the area, there was also scaffolding and a large skip, so i dont think any cctv will have captured it
@RedLassie, first and foremost then hope you are ok; resolve the presumed insurance claim; and recover quickly.
Other Forum threads have highlighted, at length, that many countries (US, UK, âŚ) legally consider housesitting as employment with in-kind compensation. To our knowledge, this has been the case for many years. But the existence, nevermind active enforcement, of that legal position by authorities has changed materially in recent whiles. Weâre not lawyers but this is our understanding.
Thereâs some unknowns here but seems likely great idea to restrain from voluntary disclosure of housesitting context in any related communications.
yup, I will be less forthcoming if ever in this situation again. I am just naturally chatty, and was conveying my concern, how will I get back to the house?, I am not from here, where can I leave my car, safely?, as it was now blocking a narrow lane??. 2 people unconnected to the incident, some time later, (after my tel calls) helped direct the traffic on main road to pause while I slowly REVERSED onto it, illegal move, on 3 good wheels, and got my car parked up safely on the main road for overnight until it was towed to a repair garage next day.
I was on double yellows too, but left a note on windscreen, UNDRIVEABLE, due to RTA, and thankfully did not receive a parking fine.
Hi @RedLassie What a stressful situation, and especially whilst youâre away from home.
Iâm not sure how looking after dogs and receiving no payment for doing so can possibly be classed as âworkâ for insurance purposes, whether done through THS or by word of mouth for friends/family. Unless youâre running a pet-sitting business and submitting tax returns etc. surely it would fall under using the car for âsocial and domesticâ purposes?
I am hoping it will not be an issue, so far the insurance company have not asked me why I was away from home. Just 31 miles away, so the owner could quite feasibly be a friend I am visiting.
Glad that he wasnât texting to try and intimidate you into admitting any sort of liability, or that you agreed with him about not being insured.
My opinion is that in this context dog and house sitting would be a very grey area, the law about it being an unpaid for of employment is primarily for visitors to the UK, rather than residents. I think it highly unlikely that either insurer would try to use that as an argument to invalidate your policy. If they did then I would take your case to the insurance ombudsman, they are more inclined to make a sensible judgement.
I asked Googleâs Gemini AI bot this âis house and pet sitting considered as unpaid work by car insurers?â
House and pet sitting is generally not considered âunpaid workâ by default under car insurance, but it frequently falls into a grey area that insurers may classify as business use or commuting rather than standard âsocial, domestic, and pleasureâ use
Looking at the photo of your car unless the image is reversed then itâs the front left that was struck, which suggests you were coming from his right. The law is pretty clear about right of way, give way to the right.
He already tried to suggest I was speeding in a 20mph zone, but he actually said verbally you were bombing along, untrue, and if i had been, then why still pull out? contradicting himself. I had just turned right from a junction on a High Street, onto a street with parked cars all the way along, no opportunity for building up speed really.
i think the telling me I am uninsured is him trying to put the frighteners on me, to save his own bacon. Hoping I would withdraw my claim.. I told him I donât work, I am retired.
What he might think about the speed at which you were driving is hearsay, inadmissible and immaterial. Without any evidence from cameras the insurers will dismiss it Iâm sure.
Even if you were driving to work, that does not constitute using your car for work. Driving to work is normal car usage and is not business use of the car.
And no dogs were in the car. I was once in a situation where I was hit. I told them I was on my way to work at local council swimming pool as a teacher. Insurance actually asked me if I was transporting pupils..as if
Unless things are very different in countries outside the US, itâd be his insurer who will have to pay out since he was at fault â which I expect is why heâs trying to claim Lassie was âworkingâ and therefore not properly insured.
I agree heâs clutching at straws. How sheâs using the car is irrelevant when heâs at fault & itâs his insurer whoâll get the claim. And as noted, she wasnât driving the dogs at the time anyway. People drive to/from âworkâ all the time â AND this isnât a job or profession.
That said â what a jerk. Glad youâre OK, @RedLassie but so sorry about your car, & that you have to deal with this.
it is the same here, guilty partyâs insurer pays out
yes, mine said confident of a win v his insurers, and if they said he was ânot at faultâ my ones will take it to court. and that was just from photo, and before car arrived at garage to be assessed.
if you join the flow of traffic when itâs not clear to do so, take the risk, then itâs on you.
