Drink driving insurance

[wjwren]

Saw a smashed Maserati levante last night. Made me think. Is it insurance company dependant whether they pay out? Or are you just covered for third party damage?

[Aretnap]

Depends on the terms of your insurance policy.

Many will pay out as normal if you have a drink related accident (just as they would if you were driving too fast, not paying attention to the road ahead, gambling on the amber light or doing any of the hundred other stupid dangerous things you can do in a car.

Others (eg Hastings) will reduce cover to third party only.

And some (eg Admiral) will go as far as the Road Traffic Act allows them - they'll pay out to the third party, then come after you for whatever they've had to pay out.

[Cyberprog]

Aretnap said:

Depends on the terms of your insurance policy.

Many will pay out as normal if you have a drink related accident (just as they would if you were driving too fast, not paying attention to the road ahead, gambling on the amber light or doing any of the hundred other stupid dangerous things you can do in a car.

Others (eg Hastings) will reduce cover to third party only.

And some (eg Admiral) will go as far as the Road Traffic Act allows them - they'll pay out to the third party, then come after you for whatever they've had to pay out.

Frankly, I think they should all do what Admiral does. Reckon we'd see a decent drop in DUI.

[Griffith4ever]

Cyberprog said:

Aretnap said:

Depends on the terms of your insurance policy.

Many will pay out as normal if you have a drink related accident (just as they would if you were driving too fast, not paying attention to the road ahead, gambling on the amber light or doing any of the hundred other stupid dangerous things you can do in a car.

Others (eg Hastings) will reduce cover to third party only.

And some (eg Admiral) will go as far as the Road Traffic Act allows them - they'll pay out to the third party, then come after you for whatever they've had to pay out.

Frankly, I think they should all do what Admiral does. Reckon we'd see a decent drop in DUI.

Would not make a jot of difference. People don't make rational choices to DD, they do it once they've had a few.

Trust me, someone who is contemplating driving home after 5 pints doesn't think, "hmm, what about the insurance?", they think, "best not get caught".

[SS2.]

Cyberprog said:

Frankly, I think they should all do what Admiral does. Reckon we'd see a decent drop in DUI.

I very much doubt it would make any appreciable difference.

[Dave Hedgehog]

wjwren said:

Saw a smashed Maserati levante last night. Made me think. Is it insurance company dependant whether they pay out? Or are you just covered for third party damage?

mate got done for DUI the morning after a few years back

insurance paid out for the other car in the accident, then sued him for the money

refused to pay for his leased X5M that was written off

along with the ban and fines it was an expensive morning

[Draxindustries1]

Alcoholics never think of the consequences, they'll just go ahead and drink/ drug drive whenever they see fit, sod anyone else on the road..

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Draxindustries1 said:

Alcoholics never think of the consequences, they'll just go ahead and drink/ drug drive whenever they see fit, sod anyone else on the road..

I'm no defender of drink drivers, but I'm not sure they are all alcoholics. Or even sure most of them are alcoholics.

[ruggedscotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Draxindustries1 said:

Alcoholics never think of the consequences, they'll just go ahead and drink/ drug drive whenever they see fit, sod anyone else on the road..

I'm no defender of drink drivers, but I'm not sure they are all alcoholics. Or even sure most of them are alcoholics.

might not be alcoholics but they are certainly s....

was unfortunate to have gone through an episode with a drunk driver that nearly killed me. while to get over it and will condemn any that get behind the wheel after drinking.

[Cliftonite]

SS2. said:

Cyberprog said:

Frankly, I think they should all do what Admiral does. Reckon we'd see a decent drop in DUI.

I very much doubt it would make any appreciable difference.

It would if the drunk were unable to afford a replacement vehicle in which to repeat the crime.

[Cyberprog]

Cliftonite said:

It would if the drunk were unable to afford a replacement vehicle in which to repeat the crime.

Exactly, and if it was well publicized that people were getting sued for the damages and being left without their vehicles too. The higher profile the better.

[Gareth79]

Griffith4ever said:

Would not make a jot of difference. People don't make rational choices to DD, they do it once they've had a few.

Trust me, someone who is contemplating driving home after 5 pints doesn't think, "hmm, what about the insurance?", they think, "best not get caught".

An example is Scotland, where the limit was reduced to 0.05 it had no effect on the rate of drink-driving, and collisions caused by it:
https://phys.org/news/2021-08-introduction-stricte...

The conclusion is that people who were driving with .05-.08 were not those causing collisions before, it was people drinking well over and who continued to drink well over the limit.

Dave Hedgehog said:

wjwren said:

Saw a smashed Maserati levante last night. Made me think. Is it insurance company dependant whether they pay out? Or are you just covered for third party damage?

mate got done for DUI the morning after a few years back

insurance paid out for the other car in the accident, then sued him for the money

refused to pay for his leased X5M that was written off

along with the ban and fines it was an expensive morning

A case I read about recently - woman owns a £30k Mercedes on finance, insured with Tesco which has a similar exclusion to Admiral. Boyfriend insured on it and takes it to the pub. She stated that he called her at midnight saying he was drunk and was going to drive home, she tells him he has no permission to do so. He crashes the car, it's a write-off, he's arrested etc. Tesco decline the claim, and I think he hit another vehicle and they wanted £10k for repairs they paid out to that too. During her ombudsman appeal says she had attempted to call Tesco to remove him from the policy right after he called but the call centre was closed, although obviously one wonders if that happened or was a retrospective statement so that it could be turned into a theft claim.

Edited by Gareth79 on Tuesday 4th October 17:49

[Griffith4ever]

Gareth79 said:

An example is Scotland, where the limit was reduced to 0.05 it had no effect on the rate of drink-driving, and collisions caused by it:
https://phys.org/news/2021-08-introduction-stricte...

I imagine the only consequence lowering the rate to 0.05 has had is that more people get banned.

[TGCOTF-dewey]

wjwren said:

Saw a smashed Maserati levante last night. Made me think. Is it insurance company dependant whether they pay out? Or are you just covered for third party damage?

It wasn't matte grey was it by any chance?

I reported a chap to the police a couple of years ago... He was pissed as newt. Wrong side of the road on blind bends level drunk. Very lucky he didn't kill someone. He was driving a levante in matte grey.

Police weren't remotely interested despite video evidence.