Domino effect accident - which party do you claim off?
Discussion
Friend got woken up to find a drunk driver had crashed into a parked car a few houses down.
This car had in turn hit their neighbours car, which in turn hit my friends car.
The drunk driver was uninsured apparently.
My understanding is that my friend claims off their neighbour, and everything "upstream" of that isn't their concern?
This car had in turn hit their neighbours car, which in turn hit my friends car.
The drunk driver was uninsured apparently.
My understanding is that my friend claims off their neighbour, and everything "upstream" of that isn't their concern?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
This is the correct answer.
Yet I've seen reports (although they may be incorrect), where a stolen car chased by the Police has caused damage to other peoples property, and due to the driver of the stolen car not being insured to drive it, the owners insurance has been required to pay.And just to contradict myself, I had a personal experience in 2003 where a driver was uninsured to drive his fathers car, hit mine, and it was all left to the MIB to pay me, despite the car actually having insurance.
I have also been the front vehicle of a three vehicle collision, at that time on that incident my insurance claimed from the vehicle behind, then they had to claim their and my damage from the vehicle at the rear.
Does this stuff change often or are things done on a case by case basis ?
MIB may pay depending on insurance status of a stolen/uninsured car(can't recall the exact rules as it's been a few years since I did this)
In a 3 car shunt:A<-B<-C, it's reasonable for A to claim against B, who can then blame C,that liability will depend on the facts.
I remember 1 case where 5 cars were involved, all big saloons who blamed the
Car behind,till it got to #5, a classic Mini with a tiny dent on the bumper...So pretty obvious someone was lieing
In a 3 car shunt:A<-B<-C, it's reasonable for A to claim against B, who can then blame C,that liability will depend on the facts.
I remember 1 case where 5 cars were involved, all big saloons who blamed the
Car behind,till it got to #5, a classic Mini with a tiny dent on the bumper...So pretty obvious someone was lieing
Nigel Worc's said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
This is the correct answer.
Yet I've seen reports (although they may be incorrect), where a stolen car chased by the Police has caused damage to other peoples property, and due to the driver of the stolen car not being insured to drive it, the owners insurance has been required to pay.That's an agreement between insurers and the MIB.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Nigel Worc's said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
This is the correct answer.
Yet I've seen reports (although they may be incorrect), where a stolen car chased by the Police has caused damage to other peoples property, and due to the driver of the stolen car not being insured to drive it, the owners insurance has been required to pay.That's an agreement between insurers and the MIB.
Landshark said:
That's not my experience, if the stolen car is insured, that insurance pays. If the car is uninsured or not traced the MIB pays
Twig is correct, the Road Traffic Act makes the Insurer of the vehicle liable if the uninsured driver is identified.If the vehicle is insured but the driver unidentified the Insurer is not liable under the RTA but the MIB will (Eventually) pass the claim back to the Insurer to pay but under the umbrella of the MIB.
If there is no Insurance at all the MIB will pay (Assuming the injured party does not have comprehensive cover)
dacouch said:
Landshark said:
That's not my experience, if the stolen car is insured, that insurance pays. If the car is uninsured or not traced the MIB pays
Twig is correct, the Road Traffic Act makes the Insurer of the vehicle liable if the uninsured driver is identified.If the vehicle is insured but the driver unidentified the Insurer is not liable under the RTA but the MIB will (Eventually) pass the claim back to the Insurer to pay but under the umbrella of the MIB.
If there is no Insurance at all the MIB will pay (Assuming the injured party does not have comprehensive cover)
And either way if the claim comes back to them via mib, why won't the cars' insurers pick up in the first place?
WillG said:
What? On paper that might be correct but I have never seen this applied in real life. How do you prove the driver of stolen car has been "traced", technically you'd have to wait for a conviction at trial, etc.....
And either way if the claim comes back to them via mib, why won't the cars' insurers pick up in the first place?
Traced as in idenitified, so if the Police arrest someone.And either way if the claim comes back to them via mib, why won't the cars' insurers pick up in the first place?
When it's paid under the umbrella of the MIB, there are different rules applied to a road traffic accident than under a normal claim.
WillG said:
dacouch said:
Landshark said:
That's not my experience, if the stolen car is insured, that insurance pays. If the car is uninsured or not traced the MIB pays
Twig is correct, the Road Traffic Act makes the Insurer of the vehicle liable if the uninsured driver is identified.If the vehicle is insured but the driver unidentified the Insurer is not liable under the RTA but the MIB will (Eventually) pass the claim back to the Insurer to pay but under the umbrella of the MIB.
If there is no Insurance at all the MIB will pay (Assuming the injured party does not have comprehensive cover)
55palfers said:
Other than the usual drunk driving penalties then, does one assume drunken afford pays nothing?
Drunk can be sued by MIB, or his own insurers if they have to indemnify under RTA only. They usually try to get a signed agreement off them otherwise injured party needs to get a judgementYep, the drunk is the one whom you claim off.
Last year my cousins car (a Corsa) was hit by a large 4x4 whilst it was parked outside his parents’ house. The car was punted down the street 3 doors and through a fence (naturally it was written off) apparently the 4x4 was a getaway vehicle (probably nicked) from a botched robbery down the street, it made its getaway, nobody got the registration (it was late at night/early hours of the morning).
The neighbours a few doors down wanted to claim on my cousins insurance for a new fence; they were told that they had to claim against the person that had caused the incident, which as he was in bed at the time most certainly wasn't in. He had to claim off his own insurance to allow him to get a new car.
I'd love to have seen the output from the black box for that shunt.
Last year my cousins car (a Corsa) was hit by a large 4x4 whilst it was parked outside his parents’ house. The car was punted down the street 3 doors and through a fence (naturally it was written off) apparently the 4x4 was a getaway vehicle (probably nicked) from a botched robbery down the street, it made its getaway, nobody got the registration (it was late at night/early hours of the morning).
The neighbours a few doors down wanted to claim on my cousins insurance for a new fence; they were told that they had to claim against the person that had caused the incident, which as he was in bed at the time most certainly wasn't in. He had to claim off his own insurance to allow him to get a new car.
I'd love to have seen the output from the black box for that shunt.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff