Drunk people and insurance

[hairykrishna]

Drunk girl managed to crash into my (parked) RX8 last night and totally wreck it. Definitely going as a write off. She was breathalysed at the scene, arrested etc. Am I going to have any difficulties with insurance claims because of the state she was in? I'm assuming her insurance will pay out as normal and pursue her for costs?

[p4cks]

Aye you'll be OK. They won't pay out for the damage to her car though, so she's fked.

[hairykrishna]

p4cks said:

Aye you'll be OK. They won't pay out for the damage to her car though, so she's fked.

I've only had the car for a few weeks and loved it so I have limited sympathy for her At least she didn't hurt anyone or herself.

[Sheepshanks]

p4cks said:

Aye you'll be OK. They won't pay out for the damage to her car though, so she's fked.

I've only seen that clause in Admiral policies - I don't think it's routine.

[cuprabob]

Sorry to hear about your predicament but as said, you'll be fine. As this is PH though we have to ask one important question.. ... was she fit?

[kiethton]

Sheepshanks said:

I've only seen that clause in Admiral policies - I don't think it's routine.

Its in my policy - my car's not covered if i crash DD'ing - Insurance via Flux

[super7]

The insurance will pay out the third party and then, on conviction, will probably go after the girl aswell to cover their losses, as her policy is now invalid!!

Her only hope will be that she can't afford to repay the costs and they may decide it's not worth pursuing and leave it.

Not a good situation for her, and I hope she hasn't taken a hire car, she'll be paying for that aswell!!

[TwigtheWonderkid]

super7 said:

The insurance will pay out the third party and then, on conviction, will probably go after the girl aswell to cover their losses, as her policy is now invalid!!

That's mainly wrong. Most insurance policies do not have of clause restricting cover if you are drunk at the time, providing you haven't got a previous drink drive conviction on your record, and will pay both own damage and tp damage.

A few reduce the cover to tpo if drunk, so won't pay your own damage. And I think a couple offer no cover at all, so will pay the tp and then come after the driver for their outlay.

[super7]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

super7 said:

The insurance will pay out the third party and then, on conviction, will probably go after the girl aswell to cover their losses, as her policy is now invalid!!

That's mainly wrong. Most insurance policies do not have of clause restricting cover if you are drunk at the time, providing you haven't got a previous drink drive conviction on your record, and will pay both own damage and tp damage.

A few reduce the cover to tpo if drunk, so won't pay your own damage. And I think a couple offer no cover at all, so will pay the tp and then come after the driver for their outlay.

Errrrrrrrrr...... I beg to differ! Read the small print of your policy. Exclusions!!!! I know they do this as I have experience of someone who this happened to! All my policies state this as well! They will cover their statutory requirments of providing insurance, and when your convicted (your not a drink driver until you have!) they will remove your cover and chase you for their losses, They will also let you run up all sorts of costs before telling you your not covered. Once convicted they send a nice person around to interogate you and make a decision whether they could sue you for the costs or whether they're going to just write the loss off.

[dacouch]

hairykrishna said:

Drunk girl managed to crash into my (parked) RX8 last night and totally wreck it. Definitely going as a write off. She was breathalysed at the scene, arrested etc. Am I going to have any difficulties with insurance claims because of the state she was in? I'm assuming her insurance will pay out as normal and pursue her for costs?

Sometimes drunk drivers take a while to report the accident to their Insurers and in such circumstances the third party Insurers can hold off accepting liability until they've spoken to their customer.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

super7 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

super7 said:

The insurance will pay out the third party and then, on conviction, will probably go after the girl aswell to cover their losses, as her policy is now invalid!!

That's mainly wrong. Most insurance policies do not have of clause restricting cover if you are drunk at the time, providing you haven't got a previous drink drive conviction on your record, and will pay both own damage and tp damage.

A few reduce the cover to tpo if drunk, so won't pay your own damage. And I think a couple offer no cover at all, so will pay the tp and then come after the driver for their outlay.

Errrrrrrrrr...... I beg to differ! Read the small print of your policy. Exclusions!!!! I know they do this as I have experience of someone who this happened to! All my policies state this as well! They will cover their statutory requirments of providing insurance, and when your convicted (your not a drink driver until you have!) they will remove your cover and chase you for their losses, They will also let you run up all sorts of costs before telling you your not covered. Once convicted they send a nice person around to interogate you and make a decision whether they could sue you for the costs or whether they're going to just write the loss off.

Just not true. I'm with Aviva, the K's largest motor insurer, no such exclusion. Allianz and Zurich, no such exclusion. It's not the usual thing to have a drink drive cover exclusion, all of the Admiral group of companies and a few others, and that's it.

[vikingaero]

kiethton said:

Sheepshanks said:

I've only seen that clause in Admiral policies - I don't think it's routine.

Its in my policy - my car's not covered if i crash DD'ing - Insurance via Flux

You just said the F-Word.

Is it surprising that Flux have this clause? No. I swear all their call centre agents take a rock of crack cocaine at their morning briefing to see how far they can fk over their loyal customers with random made up stuff.