A van and a wall.

[chili1]

Morning,

Yesterday, a gentleman managed to park his van on my mothers driveway. Unfortunately, in doing so, he demolished a brick wall, pair of gates and a fence.
Bloke driving the (company) van was not the owner of the vehicle. Owner of vehicle turns up (boss of company), and states that the van driver was not insured to drive the van, although boss had allowed him to drive van knowing that he was uninsured. Boss gave the option of going through the insurance, but saying that boss was driving the van (van is also written off). I've stated that I don't care how damage to property is repaired, but I don't want to get involved in insurance fraud. I've asked him to arrange two quotes to repair damage, and to get back to me by Wednesday, otherwise I'll report him for no insurance. If I report him, will his insurance still pay out for 3rd party damage even though the driver was uninsured?

Thanks.

[fred bloggs]

Contact police. Get the uninsured done for it,and also the boss will get done for not insuring his driver.
Youll get the monies. If you dont get the authorities involved ,itll go wrong.

[Evolved]

No, he wasn't insured to drive. Would the insurance pay out if he had caused a road accident? Same answer as he is uninsured.

What sort of two bit company let's people drive their vehicles knowing they're uninsured anyway, the mind boggles. It may be worth getting the police involved in case he starts denying the fact his van was involved.

Edited by Evolved on Sunday 17th January 10:00

Edited by Evolved on Sunday 17th January 10:05

[JulianHJ]

Both driver and owner have committed offences. I'm certain your mother can claim off the owner's insurance. BIB should be interested, but no guarantees there.

[Evolved]

JulianHJ said:

Both driver and owner have committed offences. I'm certain your mother can claim off the owner's insurance. BIB should be interested, but no guarantees there.

Really? Not arguing but I'm curious as to why the insurance would pay out when the driver wasn't insured to drive?

[R1 Indy]

Pretty sure the Van's insurance will pay for damage to your wall etc, but not for the van. As whilst the driver was not insured, the van was and the driver is identifiable.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Evolved said:

No, he wasn't insured to drive. Would the insurance pay out if he had caused a road accident? Same answer as he is not insured.

Wrong. The insurer is obligated to pay the tp damage. They can then sue their client for their outlay. Get on the their insurers and get the ball rolling.

[m0ff]

Evolved said:

Really? Not arguing but I'm curious as to why the insurance would pay out when the driver wasn't insured to drive?

I could be wrong (and I probably am), but I'm led to believe the Third Party Liability part of the policy would still apply in this instance, but the insurer would seek to recover their losses from the policyholder/uninsured driver and could press for prosecution etc.

[TooMany2cvs]

Evolved said:

Really? Not arguing but I'm curious as to why the insurance would pay out when the driver wasn't insured to drive?

Because the driver's been identified, and has no other insurance cover which would replace the van insurer's legal TP obligation. That simple.

TBH, if it were me, I'd be putting £4 to MID, getting the details, and just writing direct to the insurer. Let them sort it out with their client. Whether you want to cc the letter to the local police is a separate issue, but I'd imagine there could be issues of proof if they didn't attend the scene.

[SS2.]

I wonder if the owner knows just serious things could get for him if the police were to be involved - causing or permitting carries the same penalties as the act of uninsured driving itself, with the accident serving to act as an aggravating factor.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

m0ff said:

Evolved said:

Really? Not arguing but I'm curious as to why the insurance would pay out when the driver wasn't insured to drive?

I could be wrong (and I probably am), but I'm led to believe the Third Party Liability part of the policy would still apply in this instance, but the insurer would seek to recover their losses from the policyholder/uninsured driver and could press for prosecution etc.

Nope, you're right.

[Evolved]

Fair enough, I assumed as the driver was uninsured they'd wash their hands of it.

Edited by Evolved on Sunday 17th January 10:23

[t400ble]

I'd have just given the Police a call

[dacouch]

R1 Indy said:

Pretty sure the Van's insurance will pay for damage to your wall etc, but not for the van. As whilst the driver was not insured, the van was and the driver is identifiable.

Spot on.

Karma means the van itself won't be covered by the policy so the owners decision to allow his employee to drive uninsured will mean he's out of pocket for the cost of the van and may also have his own insurers pursuing him for the cost to replace the wall etc.

[norush]

Where's Loon when you need him?

[marting]

norush said:

Where's Loon when you need him?

I can sub in and belittle OP for no reason. I shan't be able to help on the insurance side though.

[herewego]

My understanding is that, providing he didn't know he was not insured, the driver of the van would have a defence to an uninsured charge in that he was driving his employer's vehicle and would have expected it to be insured. He doesn't have access to his employer's paperwork.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

herewego said:

My understanding is that, providing he didn't know he was not insured, the driver of the van would have a defence to an uninsured charge in that he was driving his employer's vehicle and would have expected it to be insured. He doesn't have access to his employer's paperwork.

Correct.

[Rubin215]

marting said:

norush said:

Where's Loon when you need him?

I can sub in and belittle OP for no reason. I shan't be able to help on the insurance side though.

"The OP is obviously a liar and a fantasist anyway." a spokesman for the insurance industry said...

[matchmaker]

marting said:

norush said:

Where's Loon when you need him?

I can sub in and belittle OP for no reason. I shan't be able to help on the insurance side though.