theconrodkid
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 10:24 AM |
|
|
insurance q
my saab no longer has insurance as i transferred it to my new jalopy
anyhow,today some tard crashed into her,i have contacted his insurance co and given all the relevant details,thing is,as mine isnt insured,will i get
shafted?
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
|
|
eznfrank
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 10:30 AM |
|
|
Where was it when the accident happened? Were the police notified?
From an insurance viewpoint as long as you are judged not to blame then you should be ok, all depends if police get involved
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 10:50 AM |
|
|
If you have a motor car parked on a public road without insurance then you are committing an offence. You don't have to be in it or driving it.
I got done 35 years ago for this.
These days the law has changed and you also have to keep a car insured unless it is sorned. This might have replaced the old law or the old law may
still apply as well. And if it's sorned it must not be on a public road.
As to wether you will get shafted;
1. Insurance companies are benevolent institutions and will not try to squirm out of paying. This may be true in cases of a genuine accident.
2. Cops wouldn't be very interested but might if they are told as an accident has occurred but probably wouldn't want to.
3. How long has the car been uninsured but not sorned? DVLA might be on your trail regardless of the accident.
[Edited on 17/5/11 by Dusty]
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 11:16 AM |
|
|
Is it taxed?
Phil
|
|
|
coyoteboy
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 01:28 PM |
|
|
If it's parked on the road and someone wants to notify the police, yes you could get bent over royally, there's a few reasons you're
not allowed to keep uninsured cars on the road - this isn't one (unless you parked it in a stupid/dangerous place) but you'll be had under
the same laws. I'm not sure whether the other guys insurance would have any reason to alert the authorities, but if they think they have even a
remote hint of a claim against you (as above, bad parking, car without decent reflectors etc) they'll find every avenue to scare you off.
http://www.buymycarinsurance.co.uk/taxed-but-uninsured-cars-could-be-clamped-or-seized-under-a-new-government-initiative/
[Edited on 17/5/11 by coyoteboy]
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 01:32 PM |
|
|
isnt the first thing the other guys insurance do, will be check who yours is insured with?
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 01:35 PM |
|
|
We need to know more... where was your car at the time? Was it on a road?
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 07:23 PM |
|
|
it is taxed and was parked outside my house.
my reasoning is,it is my property and was damaged by the insurance co,s driver therefore what ever property it may have been,even a weelie bin,they
are responsible?
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 07:34 PM |
|
|
Does it have a valid MOT?
Phil
|
|
|
cliftyhanger
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 08:04 PM |
|
|
May be tricky, especially if they kick off about no insurance.
May be worth trying the approach that as it was entirely the drivers fault, you have no intention of claiming via your insurance, and expect their
company to cover all damages. If they get sniffy, let the driver know you intend claiming from them via the small claims court. This is a perfectly
acceptable, but little used method in insurance claims (or at least that is what I was led to believe by a legal professional) and may well make the
driver put pressure on their insurer.
I hope you got the name and address!
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 08:41 PM |
|
|
How bad is the damage? You could always offer the option to settle without him/her going through their insurance company. It's quite likely
they'll have a hefty excess to pay anyway, so it might actually be cheaper for them.
If the car is taxed and has a valid MOT, I don't think there's any current legislation that says it has to be insured to be parked on a
public highway.
Phil
[Edited on 17-5-11 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/5/11 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
If it's not insured then it shouldn't have been on the road. Doesn't matter if it was taxed or tested. You have committed an
offence.
May seem harsh, but that's the reality.
I would therefore doubt that you'll have any joy... in fact, raising your head above the parapet on this one may lead to more grief!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 18/5/11 at 02:43 AM |
|
|
As above, your not allowed to park a car on the road without insurance so I wouldn't think they'd pay out.
A friends cousin had his car hit by a bus and the bus companies insurance claimed his car wasn't insured because it had non standard alloys and
said as such they didn't have to pay. He managed to produce the original reciept (Which he found in the service history) which proved the car
came with them and then they paid out. From that I'd deduce that they'll not pay out and they'll try and have you done for insurance
fraud, or not having insurance or some thing else simillar.
In a White Room, With Black Curtains, By the Station.
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 18/5/11 at 07:15 AM |
|
|
cheers for you replies,even if some are not what i want to hear
yes it has an mot,if they get funny i will claim in the small claims court.
the damage is a broken door mirror and both doors damaged so as the car is worth around £500 mark i would say it is a write off.
i will keep you informed
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
40inches
|
| posted on 18/5/11 at 08:04 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dusty
1. Insurance companies are benevolent institutions and will not try to squirm out of paying. This may be true in cases of a genuine accident.
[Edited on 17/5/11 by Dusty]
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 18/5/11 at 07:51 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
If it's not insured then it shouldn't have been on the road. Doesn't matter if it was taxed or tested. You have committed an
offence.
What offence has been committed and where is this legislation?
Phil
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 18/5/11 at 09:04 PM |
|
|
Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act.
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act—
(a) a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of
insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act, and
(b) a person must not cause or permit any other person to use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle
by that other person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of
this Act.
(2) If a person acts in contravention of subsection (1) above he is guilty of an offence.
(3) A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of this section shall not be convicted if he proves—
(a) that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,
(b) that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and
(c) that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is
mentioned in subsection (1) above.
(4) This Part of this Act does not apply to invalid carriages.
The meaning of the word 'use' has been tested (Pumbien v Vines). This resulted in a 'stated-case' where...
A motor car parked on a road was being used on the road for the purposes of sections 47 and 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 even if it was totally
immobilised and could only be moved by being dragged away, and, therefore, required both a valid MOT certificate and an insurance policy.
The Court so held in dismissing an appeal by way of case stated by Andee Pumbien against his conviction of offences of using a motor vehicle on a road
without either a valid test certificate or insurance policy contrary to sections 47(1) and 143(1) of the 1988 act.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 19/5/11 at 07:44 AM |
|
|
I feel you might use the "silver lining" approach and figure you have a lot of Saab parts to break. However trying to claim is probably
going to open the can of worms that is 6 points for an IN10
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 19/5/11 at 09:17 AM |
|
|
i just spoken to "nikki" the engineer,must have been all of 19
anyhow,she says she cant see a problem as it,s her clients fault and i asked for £500 (what the car is worth on a good day) and her body on saturday
night,she will get back to me on the first point but declined the second
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 20/5/11 at 10:08 AM |
|
|
update part duex
she offered me £910 for the car
get the cheque next week
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 20/5/11 at 10:14 AM |
|
|
Glad it worked out for you.
Now grab the money and run... quietly!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 20/5/11 at 07:03 PM |
|
|
what to squander my new found riches on????
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
