BMW M2 Accident

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

janesmith1950 said:

Burwood said:

He wasn’t negligent. He was wilfully reckless. Reckless driving includes unlawful and unsafe driving with a disregard for the safety of other motorists and pedestrians.

There is zero chance they will pay for his loss. The tree and third party yes. The car may not have been his. If his parents, they will pay. But claim the loss from him. He’s fked

With the greatest of respect, you don't know what you're talking about.

They will have paid out.

They could only avoid doing so if they could prove he purposely crashed or was entirely indifferent as to whether he did or not.

That's a much higher bar than you think.

If you leave your front door unlocked, and you're burgled, your insurance company wont pay out. Leaving your front door unlocked isn't asking to be burgled, but driving like he did is asking to bend metal. They wont pay out IMO.

[Burwood]

janesmith1950 said:

Burwood said:

I’m more than happy to be proven wrong. Unless it’s an area of your expertise, it’s sheer speculation. He should not be covered. The little st.

I'm not defending him. It's just reality.

But what is your expertise? You seem so sure. I’ve just looked at my policy. Reckless driving and dangerous driving, not covered. Third party, of course it’s covered. I drink 10 pints, not covered, fact.

[anonymous-user]

FFS, what do people think comprehensive insurance is there for? People don't have accidents on purpose by definition. That's why they're insured....

[Kid A]

TheJimi said:

Kid, what's your skin in the game here?

Did this guy steal your girlfriend or something?

I don't like to see high premiums on insurance due to idiots like this bloke.

I drive a fast car myself and it's due to blokes like him that we have such draconian restrictions in the first place.

I also work in the insurance industry and make a decent living off litigating claims against blokes like the OP, so at least I reckon I know what I'm talking about.

[Kid A]

Ken Figenus said:

Insurance is a legal requirement for the benefit of the whole of society. It's not insisted upon by law to repair bent M2's driven by kno6heads - its mainly there to protect other people's property and to compensate them if they are involved in a loss or accident due to their wee insured scrote's proving they are a fallible dumb human.

To not want that cover as an absolute 100% minimum as a logic to save a few potential few quid of your own premium is a madness! That poor girl in this instance deserves much compensation not wriggle room for his insurer!

I only talked about his bent M2 damage - not about the injury to the lady friend. That is covered by a different insurance policy which would not have any caveats (esp given that she was a passenger anyway).

[Ed.]

Kid A said:

TheJimi said:

Kid, what's your skin in the game here?

Did this guy steal your girlfriend or something?

I don't like to see high premiums on insurance due to idiots like this bloke.

I drive a fast car myself and it's due to blokes like him that we have such draconian restrictions in the first place.

I also work in the insurance industry and make a decent living off litigating claims against blokes like the OP, so at least I reckon I know what I'm talking about.

You're not the one cold calling me about an accident I've supposedly had?

[Bumblebee7]

janesmith1950 said:

FFS, what do people think comprehensive insurance is there for? People don't have accidents on purpose by definition. That's why they're insured....

Agreed, and it's a very slippery slope if insurers were able to claim reckless, dangerous etc. driving caused an accident and as a result they won't pay out. To some degree it could be argued all accidents are caused by reckless driving.

[MarkwG]

Kid A said:

I only talked about his bent M2 damage - not about the injury to the lady friend. That is covered by a different insurance policy which would not have any caveats (esp given that she was a passenger anyway).

You're applying Australian law to a UK accident - the rules are not the same.

[Ed.]

Bumblebee7 said:

janesmith1950 said:

FFS, what do people think comprehensive insurance is there for? People don't have accidents on purpose by definition. That's why they're insured....

Agreed, and it's a very slippery slope if insurers were able to claim reckless, dangerous etc. driving caused an accident and as a result they won't pay out. To some degree it could be argued all accidents are caused by reckless driving.

+1
This is what I was eluding to in my less clear earlier post.

[daytonavrs]

If there was an accident you wanted to really get riled up about surely would be this one far worse than the one in this thread

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
(perhaps it has its own thread)

[Tim bo]

Bumblebee7 said:

janesmith1950 said:

FFS, what do people think comprehensive insurance is there for? People don't have accidents on purpose by definition. That's why they're insured....

Agreed, and it's a very slippery slope if insurers were able to claim reckless, dangerous etc. driving caused an accident and as a result they won't pay out. To some degree it could be argued all accidents are caused by reckless driving.

Disagree. There is a simple threshold here and it is a legal one.

If the police see fit to press charges, then it is not an accident. And as such any insurance policy held by the perpetrator is at that point void.

[SimonTheSailor]

daytonavrs said:

If there was an accident you wanted to really get riled up about surely would be this one far worse than the one in this thread

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
(perhaps it has its own thread)

He was put on a two-year rehabilitation order, a safer driving course, given 100 hours unpaid work and a 7pm to 7am curfew for six months. He was also ordered to pay £105 costs, which his parents promised to pay. The magistrates suggested he could pay them back by doing odd jobs about the house.

Seriously, what the f*CK is that all about ?

100 hours unpaid work ?
105 quid fine which his parents promised to pay ? Why the f*CK don't they sell their 1 million pound house and give the proceeds to the two affected families ? Very generous of them to pay his fine !!

And he could do some odd jobs to help pay back his parents ? Great advice there by the judge ! How about you go and work and give all of your salary to the dead men's families ?

Utter lunacy.

Thanks for f*cking me off.......

[zarjaz1991]

TheJimi said:

On the back of your comments, I went back to the beginning of the thread and watched that clip.

Christ, that was fast. Way too fast, for the road and proximity to pedestrians.

The witch hunt aspect still makes me uncomfortable but equally, I see why.

It's not a witch hunt. He should be in jail for what he did, that's all.

[aaron_2000]

zarjaz1991 said:

TheJimi said:

On the back of your comments, I went back to the beginning of the thread and watched that clip.

Christ, that was fast. Way too fast, for the road and proximity to pedestrians.

The witch hunt aspect still makes me uncomfortable but equally, I see why.

It's not a witch hunt. He should be in jail for what he did, that's all.

Yep, make a criminal out of a young moron that put his foot down. A very intelligent idea.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

SimonTheSailor said:

daytonavrs said:

If there was an accident you wanted to really get riled up about surely would be this one far worse than the one in this thread

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
(perhaps it has its own thread)

He was put on a two-year rehabilitation order, a safer driving course, given 100 hours unpaid work and a 7pm to 7am curfew for six months. He was also ordered to pay £105 costs, which his parents promised to pay. The magistrates suggested he could pay them back by doing odd jobs about the house.

Seriously, what the f*CK is that all about ?

100 hours unpaid work ?
105 quid fine which his parents promised to pay ? Why the f*CK don't they sell their 1 million pound house and give the proceeds to the two affected families ? Very generous of them to pay his fine !!

And he could do some odd jobs to help pay back his parents ? Great advice there by the judge ! How about you go and work and give all of your salary to the dead men's families ?

Utter lunacy.

Thanks for f*cking me off.......

Agreed, it's not an apt punishment. A lad I know was sentenced to 5 years for a one punch manslaughter some years ago. I can't see why this is any different - neither set out to kill, but still did due to their recklessness.

[BrassMan]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

SimonTheSailor said:

daytonavrs said:

I

Agreed, it's not an apt punishment. A lad I know was sentenced to 5 years for a one punch manslaughter some years ago. I can't see why this is any different - neither set out to kill, but still did due to their recklessness.

We all know that cats are dangerous and accept that people die because of them, but nearly all of us die, so we accept it. I've never had a pub fight, so someone dying in one is a shock. Look at a thread on a cyclist who has killed a pedestrian, there are only a few a year so it's a shock which meatheads can get excited about.

[Monkeylegend]

BrassMan said:

We all know that cats are dangerous and accept that people die because of them, but nearly all of us die, so we accept it. I've never had a pub fight, so someone dying in one is a shock. Look at a thread on a cyclist who has killed a pedestrian, there are only a few a year so it's a shock which meatheads can get excited about.

Should I be getting rid of my cats then, you have me worried now.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Monkeylegend said:

BrassMan said:

We all know that cats are dangerous and accept that people die because of them, but nearly all of us die, so we accept it. I've never had a pub fight, so someone dying in one is a shock. Look at a thread on a cyclist who has killed a pedestrian, there are only a few a year so it's a shock which meatheads can get excited about.

Should I be getting rid of my cats then, you have me worried now.

And, 'nearly all of us die' Do some of us live for ever then?

[Barga]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

Monkeylegend said:

BrassMan said:

We all know that cats are dangerous and accept that people die because of them, but nearly all of us die, so we accept it. I've never had a pub fight, so someone dying in one is a shock. Look at a thread on a cyclist who has killed a pedestrian, there are only a few a year so it's a shock which meatheads can get excited about.

Should I be getting rid of my cats then, you have me worried now.

And, 'nearly all of us die' Do some of us live for ever then?

Time will tell.

[GTI16V]

Just stumbled across this s thread and all I can say is "fk me, what a tt!!!"

What was he thinking? A 22 year old driving a lairy, 400bhp car along a narrow, bumpy lane with bystanders at what must be three figures.

Complete fking insanity.