Employee crashes van in their own time

[shovelheadrob]

Macneil said:

I can't see any alternative to informing his insurers, surely it is a conditionof the policy that they are informed of any possible issues that may give rise to a claim? The driver has to carry the can here. What if your son is drgged into some sort of insurance fraud case? what if he's refused insurance fr his business in the future? It's a no brainer, come clean, go by the book, throw the driver under the bus if neccessary or they'll all be out of a job.

This seems like the sensible approach, next year's premium's going to hurt! He's only had the company running for 18 months.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Macneil said:

I can't see any alternative to informing his insurers, surely it is a conditionof the policy that they are informed of any possible issues that may give rise to a claim? .

^^^^This. Your son must involve the insurance co immediately, and just tell them the truth. The driver was aware he couldn't use the van for pleasure use, but did it anyway. Then let them handle it as they see fit.

[Gary C]

shovelheadrob said:

Gary C said:

Dont understand this.

The hire companies insurer will be contacting the insurance of the OP's son with a claim, no way to avoid it unless the driver has hit and run ?

I've told my son that this is the most likely outcome. Just trying to find out if he's (my son) liable in any way.

Ah, I see.

So when the insurance company gets in touch, its the choice of saying he was on company business or drop him in it. What terms is the insurance, commuting of business class # ?

If your sons insurance company rejects the third party claim, the employee is in for a world of pain, hope the IP doesnt suddenly get a stiff neck (though I believe thats not as easy to claim for anymore)

[shovelheadrob]

I've just had a conversation with my son & he's going to see if he can get the contact details for the hire company or the driver of the other vehicle so that he can speak to them directly. Depending on the amount of damage to their vehicle will decide whether to involve the insurers. He's not going to pretend that there was a job the driver could have been going to as that's just lying & opens up a whole world of pain, so the driver's on his own regarding insurance cover etc.
He's going to call the insurance company in the morning & put them in the picture & seek their advice on the matter.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

shovelheadrob said:

I've just had a conversation with my son & he's going to see if he can get the contact details for the hire company or the driver of the other vehicle so that he can speak to them directly. Depending on the amount of damage to their vehicle will decide whether to involve the insurers. He's not going to pretend that there was a job the driver could have been going to as that's just lying & opens up a whole world of pain, so the driver's on his own regarding insurance cover etc.
He's going to call the insurance company in the morning & put them in the picture & seek their advice on the matter.

He needs to contact his own insurer before he speaks to the other driver or the hire company. Get their advice first. If he says the wrong thing to the other party, it could prejudice his own insurer's position.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

shovelheadrob said:

My son has a maintenance company, 10 vans used by employees & subcontractors for work, they're insured for work & travelling to and from, it's mutually convenient for them to work this way. They know that they're not allowed to use them for private/social domestic and pleasure use.
TIA

It is absolutely certain that if an employee keeps a van at home they will eventually use it privately. Doesn't help after the event I know, but the sensible move would be to have (in the background) insure all vehicles to include private use.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

gazza285 said:

Might not cost much more for the insurance, but the van drivers all get taxed on the personal use rate, which is £3350 off your personal allowance, as it is seen as a benefit in kind. That might make them grumpy.

Not really relevant to the thread, but:

My best guess is the majority of van drivers do not pay tax at all. The rules are less stringent than for cars, and occasional/incidental use only does not incur a charge. Many employers state that private use is not allowed & "get away" with it...so to speak.

[Gary C]

shovelheadrob said:

I've just had a conversation with my son & he's going to see if he can get the contact details for the hire company or the driver of the other vehicle so that he can speak to them directly. Depending on the amount of damage to their vehicle will decide whether to involve the insurers. He's not going to pretend that there was a job the driver could have been going to as that's just lying & opens up a whole world of pain, so the driver's on his own regarding insurance cover etc.
He's going to call the insurance company in the morning & put them in the picture & seek their advice on the matter.

wonder if the driver has his own policy that permits driving a vehicle 'not owned or hired to' them, might be able to cover the third party claim.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Gary C said:

wonder if the driver has his own policy that permits driving a vehicle 'not owned or hired to' them, might be able to cover the third party claim.

Unlikely, especially as commercial vehicle terms are usually different (but worth checking

[surveyor]

gazza285 said:

shovelheadrob said:

surveyor said:

Would it cost much more to add private use? If it does not I would seriously consider doing this, even if he does not tell the staff that they are insured...

I don't know if it's even an option, worth looking into although a bit horse, bolt, door lol!

Might not cost much more for the insurance, but the van drivers all get taxed on the personal use rate, which is £3350 off your personal allowance, as it is seen as a benefit in kind. That might make them grumpy.

Not if they are still not allowed to use it for private use. Insurance is not the decider. With trackers etc. it would not be an issue.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

surveyor said:

Not if they are still not allowed to use it for private use. Insurance is not the decider. With trackers etc. it would not be an issue.

Or just an "understanding" employer. (Which I never was )

[Graveworm]

surveyor said:

Not if they are still not allowed to use it for private use. Insurance is not the decider. With trackers etc. it would not be an issue.

I really don't know but it's the driver that needs to be insured. It's the firms vehicle, they are an employee but since they have taken it without consent (and I have seen that charged in very similar circumstances) would any insurer cover that?

However doesn't the present theft aspect of insurance cover the damage to the OP's son's van anyway?
The employee is of course still on the hook for the third party liability and the insurance Co may well chase him for theirs as well..

[shovelheadrob]

Thanks for all the input so far, he does have trackers on all vehicles & the drivers taking the vehicles home works better for all concerned as it gives better coverage for reactive maintenance, which is the core demand of his business & he doesn't have storage/parking readily available for parking 10 vans. This is the first time anyone has done this, he regularly monitors the trackers & will be writing/emailing all employees to remind them that non business use is gross misconduct with the associated repercussions.
I'm done for tonight, supposed to be on holiday, I'll be back in the morning

[Brads67]

No words about the welfare of the employee.

Had something happened in his personal life that made him act so out of character and jack his job in .?

I'd be more inclined to make sure I was looking after the welfare of my workforce as dropping him might send a message to your other staff, but if it turns out he acted that because of an event in his personal life, that message might not be a good one.

[Teddy Lop]

shovelheadrob said:

This seems like the sensible approach, next year's premium's going to hurt! He's only had the company running for 18 months.

to be honest with 10 of the firms vans its only a matter of time before someone prangs one and I doubt the insurance co will be shocked.

An independent body shop in a small city had 2 pool vehicles allocated to it by the elecrric board such was the rate at which they were un bending our company cars and vans.

[KungFuPanda]

The insurer of your son's van has a duty under the Road Traffic Act to settle all third party claims whether that employee was legally driving the vehicle at the time of the accident or not.

If indeed the employee was driving outside of the course of his employment and outside of the terms of the insurance coverage, the insurers will seek to recover their outlay from the driver.

Your son needs to collate all the evidence he has to confirm he had in place a system and records to prove the fact that all employees knew they were not allowed to use the vans outside of the course of business or commuting.

[macushla]

Brads67 said:

No words about the welfare of the employee.

Had something happened in his personal life that made him act so out of character and jack his job in .?

I'd be more inclined to make sure I was looking after the welfare of my workforce as dropping him might send a message to your other staff, but if it turns out he acted that because of an event in his personal life, that message might not be a good one.

This is pistonheads. Employees are dispensable irrelevances.

[FWIW]

shovelheadrob said:

Thanks for all the input so far, he does have trackers on all vehicles & the drivers taking the vehicles home works better for all concerned as it gives better coverage for reactive maintenance, which is the core demand of his business & he doesn't have storage/parking readily available for parking 10 vans. This is the first time anyone has done this, he regularly monitors the trackers & will be writing/emailing all employees to remind them that non business use is gross misconduct with the associated repercussions.
I'm done for tonight, supposed to be on holiday, I'll be back in the morning

Strikes me as a bit stty to force the staff to take the van home (as the employer doesn’t have space to store them) and then prohibit personal use. Not to mention the amount of time your son must spend checking the tracker records for 10 vans... (he doesn’t really do that, does he...)

[MDMA .]

FWIW said:

Strikes me as a bit stty to force the staff to take the van home (as the employer doesn’t have space to store them) and then prohibit personal use. Not to mention the amount of time your son must spend checking the tracker records for 10 vans... (he doesn’t really do that, does he...)

You'd just set the parameters to ping for certain events. Heavy acceleration/braking. Over certain mph in set zones etc. No need to monitor constantly. Daily/weekly reports are easy to print off.

[FWIW]

MDMA . said:

You'd just set the parameters to ping for certain events. Heavy acceleration/braking. Over certain mph in set zones etc. No need to monitor constantly. Daily/weekly reports are easy to print off.

Sure, but How would any of that highlight personal use?