Third Party repair costs not recoverable

[surveyor]

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Insurance-liable-po...

I'm surprised at this as I understood that Third Party cover in instances like this could not be got out of, albeit an insurance company could or would seek to recover the costs from their insured.

Interest in comments on this from the experts? Does this mean that a third party can hit us, and then the insurance company not be liable if he has not declared his modifications etc. I promise not to argue on this one!

[surveyor]

Noger said:

V8RX7 said:

That makes sense to me.
Insurance can't cover deliberate acts otherwise anyone who couldn't sell their car (or house etc) could crash / torch it and claim.

This isn't about own damage, it is about Third Party damage. Very different things. Quite easy to avoid own damage for all sorts of things.

An insurer would normally be required, under Article 75 of the MIB Agreement, to pay for this even if they could escape the requirements of the RTA.

As I correctly guessed, it is merely down to the subrogation that their INSURER cannot recover.

Put simply (I think)...

If you deliberately ram your car into someone, then you are uninsured.

If the person who you hit has only Third Party cover, then your insurer will be forced to pay under Article 75. They will not lose out.

However, if they claim on their insurance (again, they have not lost out), then THEIR insurer will not be entitled to pursue an MIB claim against YOURS. They are big boys, and this will probably all equal out in the end, and we don't want lots of subrogated MIB cases clogging up the courts (this equally applies to other restrictions such as class of use).

Seems quite sensible

Thank you - you explained it really well, and I now understand. Lots of people seem to have missed the distinction on the thread.