Shopping Cart Hit My Parked Car

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:51 am Post Subject:

How are you going to prove a shopping cart caused the damage unless you or someone witnessed it? I think you have greater standing if you were in the vehicle. It also helps if you take photos of the cart against the car. Pay no attention to those signs that say not responsible for damage to your car because of runaway carts. The store owns them, and allows their patrons to use and misuse them with their permission and incouragement. It may become a civil matter that you have to address in small claims court. I would be willing to bet the manager at Wally World has better things to do than spend three hours in court on this matter and would be willing to settle the damages if you actively pursued them with justifiable cause.

If this is your insurance company that you are talking to an adjuster about, they may try to assert that you were negligent by you driving into the cart and it could be a collision claim against you. If the wind drove the cart or kids pushed them into your car while unoccupied it would be a comprehensive claim not chargable as a driving offense on your policy most likely. Kind of like when you swerved to miss a deer and hit a tree it's collision even though an animal caused it, but if you hit the deer and then hit the tree, it would be a comp claim.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 03:43 am Post Subject:

I used to handle a lot of shoping cart claims for a grocery chain. Most of them were denied...for this reason...the store supplied a cart corral for customers to put carts in and as long as the store kept logs showing that they actively and in a timely manner collected carts from the lot and corrals, they would fight it and would usually win. It was not their fault that customers seem to refuse to put carts in the corrals that are supplied. In fact, we were able in a couple claims to put the liability on customers that did not use the corrals and their carts ran into cars. In these two cases there were witnesses showing the customers leaving the carts in the open lot. The only time they would not fight it is at one store that had a severly sloped lot where carts would roll with little assistance from wind. Even at this store it was found in court that they only had to remove the carts in a timely fashion and as long as they provided the cart corrals did not have to have an employee stationed in the lot 24/7.

As far as you being in the car, I would agree that they may be looking to see if you witnessed how the damage was done. Who knows, a customer may have ran a cart into your car. So yes, it should help you that you were in the car....unless you parked right next to a loose cart and should have known that it hit your car.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 04:21 am Post Subject:

As a 1st party claim it's a comprehensive claim, not collision regardless of why the cart hit the vehicle. There are 7 (?) named perils that fall under comprehensive. A cart colliding with the vehicle is not one of these.

OP, I think your reading too much into the question of the adjuster. If you were in the vehicle or not, I can't see how this would change the coverage. I'd recommend telling the truth so it does not raise suspicion if they later find out you lied.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 09:37 am Post Subject:

Well, I think you should always tell the truth when it comes to a settlement. You shouldn't tell something that you won't be able to change later on if it goes against your interests.

Your sitting within the car doesn't make any difference unless the car had moved to cause this collision.

Now, you'd be a better person to say a word about it!

Steven

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:04 am Post Subject:

.

tcope,

Is the general rule that if something hits your car its Comp. and if your car hits something it's Collision.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 01:18 pm Post Subject:

Whoa... I did type that backwards. I meant to say that it's going to be a collision loss regardless of why the cart rolled into the vehicle. Not comprehensive.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 07:14 pm Post Subject:

From auto policy:

Loss caused by the following is considered other than collision(aka comprhensive):
1.Missiles or falling objects
2.Fire
3.Theft or larceny
4.Exlposion or earthyquake
5.Windstorm
6.Hail water or flood
7.Malicious mischief or vandalism
8.Riot or civil commotion
9.Contact with bird or animal
10.Breakage of glass.

Tcope is right (well, once he reversed it) though windstorm is a covered comprehensive peril, it's not enough for wind to push the cart into the car as the damage is still caused by a collision. The wind would have to pick the car up off the ground so that it became a missile or falling object for this to be comprehensive.

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:48 pm Post Subject:

Most deductibles for collision are usually at least $250, if not more. Could a cart really do that much damage that it would be worth even filing the claim?

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:52 pm Post Subject:

Could a cart really do that much damage that it would be worth even filing the claim?

Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 01:08 am Post Subject:

The wind would have to pick the car up off the ground so that it became a missile or falling object for this to be comprehensive.