Injured by a VOI scooter - legal position?

[cyberknight]

and speedy and full recovery !

 

[vickster]

im not a legal eagle but you claim against VOI and they claim against the rider is the way i would imagine it works .

The driver should have insurance through VOI, isn’t that how these hire schemes work? All assuming it was the hirer who was riding and at fault?

 

[cyberknight]

The driver should have insurance through VOI, isn’t that how these hire schemes work? All assuming it was the hirer who was riding and at fault?

indeed , if you go after VOI as the insurer much like you would any other vehicle . assuming the police report is accurate then voi should know who had the scooter

 

[GlamorganGuy]

and speedy and full recovery !

Thank you very much

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Good lukc and hope it gets better soon

Let us know how it goes - it might help someone else as I am sure you won;t be the last yo be injured by one of these

 

[Emanresu]

im not a legal eagle but you claim against VOI

Difficult to do if not impossible. You are describing vicarious liability which can be used for an employee but not for a customer. It's a secondary form of liability. Primary is against the rider - if he/she can be identified.

Someone has mentioned checking household insurance which is probably the first place to start.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Difficult to do if not impossible. You are describing vicarious liability which can be used for an employee but not for a customer. It's a secondary form of liability. Primary is against the rider - if he/she can be identified.

Someone has mentioned checking household insurance which is probably the first place to start.

That sounds like something that should be improved!
I mean - it has tobe the same for car hire and the like - but identifying the rider might be almost impossible
and what if they say they lent it to someone else??
who is responsible then??
OK they have gone against the term from VOI - but where to you stand??

 

[classic33]

Difficult to do if not impossible. You are describing vicarious liability which can be used for an employee but not for a customer. It's a secondary form of liability. Primary is against the rider - if he/she can be identified.

Someone has mentioned checking household insurance which is probably the first place to start.

VOI are not only the owner of the e-scooters, they are also the insurers of those they use in these trials.

The owner has the legal obligation to name the person using the vehicle at the time. Failure to do so means the action will be taken against owner, who is now liable. Given that all their e-scooters require a debit or credit card to use them, they will have the users details.

 

[Emanresu]

The owner has the legal obligation to name the person using the vehicle at the time.

You may be right but could you point out which part of the relevant Road Traffic Act applies. Are you thinking s28?

I would be surprised if s28 applies but perhaps the OP might want to see if the police will issue one.

 

[midlife]

Section 172?

 

[GlamorganGuy]

Good lukc and hope it gets better soon

Let us know how it goes - it might help someone else as I am sure you won;t be the last yo be injured by one of these

Thanks I will... sadly you are spot on about that.

 

[Emanresu]

Thanks @midlife it is indeed s172. So if reported to the Police by the OP, have the Police asked for details of the rider or have they said it is a civil matter?

As an aside, some comments by the W Yorks Police to Parliament on the subject of e-scooters.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/5815/pdf/