Car park ding, insurance question
Discussion
Random_Person said:
You are wrong. Public places and roads differ.
A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
Yes roads and public places are different, however:A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
The Road Traffic Act 1988 (and amendments up to 27 Feb 2024) Section 143 legislates that:
a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road [or other public place] unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance ... as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act,
Random_Person said:
You are wrong. Public places and roads differ.
A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
1958? You mean a few decades before the law was changed so that most of the key provisions of the Road Traffic Act apply on a "road or other public place" rather than "a road"?A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
A car park is indeed not a road, though it may contain roads (Clarke v. Kato (1998)). However the distinction is only relevant to a relatively small subset of road traffic laws - and not to careless driving, insurance requirements, the duty to stop and give details or very much else that would be relevant to how an accident is dealt with.
For clarity:
The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 2000 amended The Road Traffic Act 1988, as follows:
….
Amendment of the Road Traffic Act 1988 in respect of motor insurance requirements
2.—(1) The Road Traffic Act 1988(1) is amended in accordance with paragraphs (2) to (6) below.
(2) In section 143 (users of motor vehicles to be insured or secured against third party risks)–
(a)in subsection (1)(a), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”;
(b)in subsection (1)(b), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(3) In section 145(3)(a) (requirements in respect of policies of insurance), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(4) In section 146(4) (requirements in respect of securities), after “road ” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(5) In section 165(1)(b) (obligation to provide name and address and produce documents to constable), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(6) In section 170 (duty to stop and report accident)–
(a)in subsection (1), after “on a road” there shall be inserted “ or other public place”,
(b)in subsection (1)(b)(iii), after “the road” there shall be inserted “ or place”.
The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 2000 amended The Road Traffic Act 1988, as follows:
….
Amendment of the Road Traffic Act 1988 in respect of motor insurance requirements
2.—(1) The Road Traffic Act 1988(1) is amended in accordance with paragraphs (2) to (6) below.
(2) In section 143 (users of motor vehicles to be insured or secured against third party risks)–
(a)in subsection (1)(a), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”;
(b)in subsection (1)(b), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(3) In section 145(3)(a) (requirements in respect of policies of insurance), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(4) In section 146(4) (requirements in respect of securities), after “road ” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(5) In section 165(1)(b) (obligation to provide name and address and produce documents to constable), after “road” there shall be inserted “or other public place”.
(6) In section 170 (duty to stop and report accident)–
(a)in subsection (1), after “on a road” there shall be inserted “ or other public place”,
(b)in subsection (1)(b)(iii), after “the road” there shall be inserted “ or place”.
Edited by Pica-Pica on Thursday 29th February 09:49
Aretnap said:
Random_Person said:
You are wrong. Public places and roads differ.
A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
1958? You mean a few decades before the law was changed so that most of the key provisions of the Road Traffic Act apply on a "road or other public place" rather than "a road"?A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
A car park is indeed not a road, though it may contain roads (Clarke v. Kato (1998)). However the distinction is only relevant to a relatively small subset of road traffic laws - and not to careless driving, insurance requirements, the duty to stop and give details or very much else that would be relevant to how an accident is dealt with.
martinbiz said:
Aretnap said:
Random_Person said:
You are wrong. Public places and roads differ.
A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
1958? You mean a few decades before the law was changed so that most of the key provisions of the Road Traffic Act apply on a "road or other public place" rather than "a road"?A car park is not a road. Supermarket scrapes are of no interest to most, scrapes in such places are fair wear and tear and can be sorted directly, as the land is private. Its still a public place open to the public, but it is not a road.
Look up Griffin v Squires 1958 if you can be bothered. Or if you can't, speak to a legal professional rather than rely on PH where only 0.0005% of the population post - and usually incorrectly.
A car park is indeed not a road, though it may contain roads (Clarke v. Kato (1998)). However the distinction is only relevant to a relatively small subset of road traffic laws - and not to careless driving, insurance requirements, the duty to stop and give details or very much else that would be relevant to how an accident is dealt with.
It seems high time that insurance companies properly defined ‘’A Claim’’ and used this as the only reporting and disclosing requirement, the only differentiator being which way fault was assigned.
All the ‘’have you been involved in any accident or loss’’ stuff is far too open to interpretation. Even on PH, some contributors want to claim for and report a door ‘ding’ in a car park whereas others wouldn’t dream of telling their insurers that they had reversed into their concrete gatepost.
It’s even more ambiguous with domestic policies. Who claims for and reports a broken window for example?
All the ‘’have you been involved in any accident or loss’’ stuff is far too open to interpretation. Even on PH, some contributors want to claim for and report a door ‘ding’ in a car park whereas others wouldn’t dream of telling their insurers that they had reversed into their concrete gatepost.
It’s even more ambiguous with domestic policies. Who claims for and reports a broken window for example?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff