possibly in the mire?
Discussion
I'd prefer to keep the details light here if possible.
A friend (yes) had an accident. Single vehicle. No one else or their property was involved or damaged. Except for the road which required mopping up as the car had got damaged to the extent that all the fluids fell out..
The driver did not inform his insurance co, however the council did of course as they required payment for the road repairs.
It is likely that the driver was not adhering to the speed limit, a theory for which the damage to the car will support.
Police did attend and take details but have made no further contact.
How screwed?
Edit... Oooops made a sweary in the title..
A friend (yes) had an accident. Single vehicle. No one else or their property was involved or damaged. Except for the road which required mopping up as the car had got damaged to the extent that all the fluids fell out..
The driver did not inform his insurance co, however the council did of course as they required payment for the road repairs.
It is likely that the driver was not adhering to the speed limit, a theory for which the damage to the car will support.
Police did attend and take details but have made no further contact.
How screwed?
Edit... Oooops made a sweary in the title..
Edited by itannum990 on Monday 1st December 18:39
Edited by itannum990 on Monday 1st December 18:39
itannum990 said:
I'd prefer to keep the details light here if possible.
A friend (yes) had an accident. Single vehicle. No one else or their property was involved or damaged. Except for the road which required mopping up as the car had got damaged to the extent that all the fluids fell out..
The driver did not inform his insurance co, however the council did of course as they required payment for the road repairs.
It is likely that the driver was not adhering to the speed limit, a theory for which the damage to the car will support.
Police did attend and take details but have made no further contact.
How screwed?
Edit... Oooops made a sweary in the title..
I think you should ask Santa for soap-on-a-rope this year.A friend (yes) had an accident. Single vehicle. No one else or their property was involved or damaged. Except for the road which required mopping up as the car had got damaged to the extent that all the fluids fell out..
The driver did not inform his insurance co, however the council did of course as they required payment for the road repairs.
It is likely that the driver was not adhering to the speed limit, a theory for which the damage to the car will support.
Police did attend and take details but have made no further contact.
How screwed?
Edit... Oooops made a sweary in the title..
Edited by itannum990 on Monday 1st December 18:39
Edited by itannum990 on Monday 1st December 18:39
6 months for summary-only offences, so nearly all of the offences that would be considered against the driver (dangerous driving doesn't have a time limit, though).
It doesn't sound like any action would be taken from what you're saying. The damage may suggest / support excess speed, but what else does? It would be need to be proven beyond reasonable doubt which would very likely need more than that you describe.
It doesn't sound like any action would be taken from what you're saying. The damage may suggest / support excess speed, but what else does? It would be need to be proven beyond reasonable doubt which would very likely need more than that you describe.
Fort Jefferson said:
I can't understand why you are so concerned, if the Police are taking no action, that's it. Your insurance is still valid when you're speeding.
As I'm a responsible law abiding citizen! Ok if insurance is still valid in the event of driver stupidity that is good. Obviously not making any claim for the car, that would be immoral.
itannum990 said:
As I'm a responsible law abiding citizen!
Ok if insurance is still valid in the event of driver stupidity that is good. Obviously not making any claim for the car, that would be immoral.
Would it? Ok if insurance is still valid in the event of driver stupidity that is good. Obviously not making any claim for the car, that would be immoral.
You had an accident, one presumes it would be a total loss payout if you claimed, plenty of people break the speed limit every day and don't have accidents. Many do.
Ultimately your risk to an insurance company is and has already been calculated in your premium. If you claim, this will likely go up to reflect your increased risk. That's effectively your "punishment" for your mistake.
I can't see any reason claiming would be immoral?
Durzel said:
itannum990 said:
As I'm a responsible law abiding citizen!
Ok if insurance is still valid in the event of driver stupidity that is good. Obviously not making any claim for the car, that would be immoral.
Would it? Ok if insurance is still valid in the event of driver stupidity that is good. Obviously not making any claim for the car, that would be immoral.
You had an accident, one presumes it would be a total loss payout if you claimed, plenty of people break the speed limit every day and don't have accidents. Many do.
Ultimately your risk to an insurance company is and has already been calculated in your premium. If you claim, this will likely go up to reflect your increased risk. That's effectively your "punishment" for your mistake.
I can't see any reason claiming would be immoral?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff