Do insurance companies pay out for drink drivers?
Discussion
Hypothetical situation;
I buy a 200k ferrari, drive while drunk, crash it into a tree and write it off. Police arrive, arrest and charge me for drink drive. The following morning I phone the insurers, tell them I had a prang but dont tell them I was arrested.
They take the car away and write/repair it. I get a court date, 3 months down the line.
Insurers spend 100k fixing the car, and i get it back a few weeks later. Court comes, I get banned, but it doesnt matter, because I can sell my ferrari, or even just store it or whatever.
So i've driven drunk, been arrested and charged, but prior to being banned the car is repaired at huge cost. Thanks to my f
kery, that cost is passed on by the insurers to everyone else who is sober and legal.
Is this right? And if so, how is this fair?
I buy a 200k ferrari, drive while drunk, crash it into a tree and write it off. Police arrive, arrest and charge me for drink drive. The following morning I phone the insurers, tell them I had a prang but dont tell them I was arrested.
They take the car away and write/repair it. I get a court date, 3 months down the line.
Insurers spend 100k fixing the car, and i get it back a few weeks later. Court comes, I get banned, but it doesnt matter, because I can sell my ferrari, or even just store it or whatever.
So i've driven drunk, been arrested and charged, but prior to being banned the car is repaired at huge cost. Thanks to my f
kery, that cost is passed on by the insurers to everyone else who is sober and legal.Is this right? And if so, how is this fair?
A few policies have an exclusion, whereby they won't pay the claim, or in some cases will only pay the tp claim, if you are drunk. All companies in the Admiral Group for a start.
But most insurers will only put that exclusion on if you've had a drink drive conviction within the last 5 years.
So yes, in most cases, they will pay out, even if you are upfront and tell them at the time of reporting the claim that you were over the limit.
They will also pay out if you were speeding, on the phone, parked on a double yellow line, up all night playing computer games, fall asleep at the wheel and crash into a train at Selby, and a whole host of other stuff you shouldn't be doing. That's the risk they take when they insure you.
But most insurers will only put that exclusion on if you've had a drink drive conviction within the last 5 years.
So yes, in most cases, they will pay out, even if you are upfront and tell them at the time of reporting the claim that you were over the limit.
They will also pay out if you were speeding, on the phone, parked on a double yellow line, up all night playing computer games, fall asleep at the wheel and crash into a train at Selby, and a whole host of other stuff you shouldn't be doing. That's the risk they take when they insure you.
Black_S3 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
But most insurers will only put that exclusion on if you've had a drink drive conviction within the last 5 years.
Drink and drugs is a standard clause in all the policies I’ve seen?I think the car lease industry would have serious issue with it if it was a common thing. Their client drives drunk but they are the ones who don't get paid, leaving them to try and sue the driver, who's just lost his job because he's banned from driving!!!
It certainly never appears on any company fleet policy, because the driver and the owner are different entities.
Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Friday 10th May 16:08
The original question was not related to whether there are exclusions in a policy or not and when they are applicable.
Simply, piss head smashes his motor, doesn't tell the Insurance Co. he was drunk, charged etc.
Get's car repaired. How would they ever find out.
Yes this is almost probably fraud but piss head isn't bothered.
Simply, piss head smashes his motor, doesn't tell the Insurance Co. he was drunk, charged etc.
Get's car repaired. How would they ever find out.
Yes this is almost probably fraud but piss head isn't bothered.
deckster said:
It's a standard clause in Admiral group policies, but as above not (yet) universal amongst other insurers.
Assuming Admiral pay 3rd Party costs, I would rather my insurance premium wasn't having to cover the repairs Drink driver's cars.....I guess there is a 'thin end of the wedge' argument, as occasionally I may be a couple of MPH over the speed limit
and still think I am insured but DD is not acceptable.....Yeah they always pay the 3rd party and some then go as far as looking to recover 3rd party costs from the drunk policy holder. I had made the assumption all policies these days had it as an exclusion which turns out to be incorrect.
Guess the OPs answer is it depends on the insurer as apparently some insurers are knowingly still providing fully comp cover for drink drive crashes.... others will look to take your house for 3rd party costs..
Guess the OPs answer is it depends on the insurer as apparently some insurers are knowingly still providing fully comp cover for drink drive crashes.... others will look to take your house for 3rd party costs..
OverSteery said:
Assuming Admiral pay 3rd Party costs, I would rather my insurance premium wasn't having to cover the repairs Drink driver's cars.....
.
What if you have named drivers on your policy, your brother or sister, or parents. And one of them writes your car off the morning after the night before, and are still just over the limit. Would you be so happy then? .
TwigtheWonderkid said:
A few policies have an exclusion.
So yes, in most cases, they will pay out,
They will also pay out if you were speeding fall asleep at the wheel...
.......crash into a train at Selby.
That's the risk they take when they insure you.
The Selby Clause.So yes, in most cases, they will pay out,
They will also pay out if you were speeding fall asleep at the wheel...
.......crash into a train at Selby.
That's the risk they take when they insure you.
I’ve a maximum limit of £25 million on my policy. Anything else is down to me but they:
(can pursue me for unrecoverable costs)
It’s not, obviously. As you say. But it makes me chuckle.
If I’m in that sort of s
t as Selby, frankly, my insurers trying to recover costs would be the least of my problems.TwigtheWonderkid said:
A few policies have an exclusion, whereby they won't pay the claim, or in some cases will only pay the tp claim, if you are drunk. All companies in the Admiral Group for a start.
But most insurers will only put that exclusion on if you've had a drink drive conviction within the last 5 years.
So yes, in most cases, they will pay out, even if you are upfront and tell them at the time of reporting the claim that you were over the limit.
They will also pay out if you were speeding, on the phone, parked on a double yellow line, up all night playing computer games, fall asleep at the wheel and crash into a train at Selby, and a whole host of other stuff you shouldn't be doing. That's the risk they take when they insure you.
But most insurers will only put that exclusion on if you've had a drink drive conviction within the last 5 years.
So yes, in most cases, they will pay out, even if you are upfront and tell them at the time of reporting the claim that you were over the limit.
They will also pay out if you were speeding, on the phone, parked on a double yellow line, up all night playing computer games, fall asleep at the wheel and crash into a train at Selby, and a whole host of other stuff you shouldn't be doing. That's the risk they take when they insure you.
No, Admiral wanted to impose that clause when I got a quote last month - as did Ageas, and I've never had more than 4 points in 40+ years - w*nkers!
So I went elsewhere and got a better deal!
But you do need to be really careful these days, as they all seem to be out to shaft you!
They charge for a protected NCD, but even if you pay for that if you have a claim they just load the premium instead - what a p*ss-take!
Sorry Twig, but these days they are all a cunch of bunts! :
Mr Tidy said:
They charge for a protected NCD, but even if you pay for that if you have a claim they just load the premium instead - what a p*ss-take!
Not true. They don't load it instead, but as well as. When you have a claim, you get two hits. 1, your risk profile may increase so you get a loaded premium, and 2, your ncb is reduced so you get a smaller discount off that loaded premium. If you have protected bonus, it protects you against 2, but has no effect on 1. So you only get hit once instead of twice.
Dave Hedgehog said:
mate involved in a crash the morning after blew over the limit, got banned
insurance would not pay for his car, payed for the other car, sued him in court and won for the cost of the other car
I knew someone who had exactly that situation, driving his car home the next morning from the pub car park where he'd left it overnight. But the accident was someone crashing into the back of him when he was stationary at a red light. I would hope his insurance covered him in that case.insurance would not pay for his car, payed for the other car, sued him in court and won for the cost of the other car
Dr Jekyll said:
I knew someone who had exactly that situation, driving his car home the next morning from the pub car park where he'd left it overnight. But the accident was someone crashing into the back of him when he was stationary at a red light. I would hope his insurance covered him in that case.
Erm, covered him for what? As there's no claim against him in that case.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff