Jump to content
eddoakley

Crashed a borrowed car

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

was your neighbour driving your car when he had the accident?

Are you offering advice , trolling or just gloating at someones misfortune ?
Ed has a £10,000 bill because he took the word of a friend as truth.

I hope you never end up in the same situation, and have someone telling you how stupid you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

was your neighbour driving your car when he had the accident?

No he wasn't and that is where the confusion has come from, if he was driving his car then he would have been insured, but because it was a van he wasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

No he wasn't and that is where the confusion has come from, if he was driving his car then he would have been insured, but because it was a van he wasn't.

i know his mate was driving his van,i don't know why he brought his neighbour into it

32 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Are you offering advice , trolling or just gloating at someones misfortune ?
Ed has a £10,000 bill because he took the word of a friend as truth.

I hope you never end up in the same situation, and have someone telling you how stupid you are.

nobody is gloating,Ed is responsible for the bill,who do you think will end up paying the bill???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Everybody should check their own private car insurance because the ability to drive somebody else's car with the owners permission has quietly been removed from a large number of car policies without telling the policy holders and a lot of people have been caught out.

It used to be a virtually universal feature of every policy and very handy but I guess it was abused. The prediction is it will be gone completely soon, it has already disappeared from motorcycle policies.  

My BIL used to drive his dad's car around all the time, taking it for MOTs etc but when I told him to check if he was still insured he found he wasn't anymore so he had to be added as a named driver

Edited by Vince Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

nobody is gloating,Ed is responsible for the bill,who do you think will end up paying the bill???

Im pretty sure that Ed knows hes paying the bill, hes stated it 4 or 5 times !

What Im not sure about, is why you keep having a dig at him about it ?

If you have nothing constructive to say , leave it be .

Just now, Vince Green said:

Everybody should check their own private car insurance because the ability to drive somebody else's car with the owners permission has quietly been removed from a large number of car policies without telling the policy holders

It used to be a virtually universal feature and very handy but I guess it was abused. The prediction is it will be gone completely soon  

Exactly.

In this case though , he was insured , in other CARS , not commercials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

i know his mate was driving his van,i don't know why he brought his neighbour into it

Yeah, sorry I missed the bit about the neighbour. I should make sure I read the posts properly in future 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Im pretty sure that Ed knows hes paying the bill, hes stated it 4 or 5 times !

What Im not sure about, is why you keep having a dig at him about it ?

If you have nothing constructive to say , leave it be .

Exactly.

In this case though , he was insured , in other CARS , not commercials.

if Ed keeps asking who's liable he'll get the same answer,the only way to get the money back is to sue his mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

if Ed keeps asking who's liable he'll get the same answer,the only way to get the money back is to sue his mate

Again , I think hes aware of that, you telling him to suck it up , isnt really helping though is it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from the Motorist lawyer website.

There are some related offences you need to be aware of. It is an offence to cause or permit someone without insurance to drive a vehicle without insurance. So if you allow a friend or relative to drive your vehicle and they do not have insurance, you will commit the offence of permitting them to drive without insurance. The fact that you did not know they were uninsured will not be a defence. However, if you gave them permission to drive on the strict condition they were in fact insured, you will be ok.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, daveboy said:

This is from the Motorist lawyer website.

There are some related offences you need to be aware of. It is an offence to cause or permit someone without insurance to drive a vehicle without insurance. So if you allow a friend or relative to drive your vehicle and they do not have insurance, you will commit the offence of permitting them to drive without insurance. The fact that you did not know they were uninsured will not be a defence. However, if you gave them permission to drive on the strict condition they were in fact insured, you will be ok.

 

This is the kind of thing that gives me some hope.

He said he was insured. He genuinely thought he was. I believed him. 

I didn't assume. I didn't decide to take a chance. I thought that asking and being assured was enough, especially as he is a decent guy who pays insurance and has regulaurly driven vans in the past. We just got the small print wrong.

BUT even if I was found to have allowed him to drive without insurance I would still be questioning why MY insurance company paid out instead of HIS. 

Mine absolutely did not cover him to drive.

His did not due to specific exclusions. He was driving. Why has MINE paid out?

I just don't get it. Surely MY insurance just pass it back to his and say "this is your clients accident, you deal with it" at which point they either pay the 3rd party and claim costs from their client, (my mate) or refuse the claim and the 3rd party claims from the uninsured drivers fund? 

If there are criminal charges for driving without insurance then that's a separate matter?

As I have repeatedly said, if all procedures have been followed and I am in fact liable then it's down to lack of understanding of how insurance works, not because anybody didn't pay insurance. It's a real kick in the nuts getting landed with a bill, especially the amount that this one is, for someone else's crash. 

I will update again if anything changes but for now its back with my insurance company waiting for them to respond to the advice that the ombudsman has given me.

Edd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ed's insurance company consider him liable for the repair bill why are we being constantly reminded of how much of our insurance premium covers uninsured driver claims?

His mate was uninsured - that fact is not disputed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost came a cropper with similar insurance small print whilst driving alone in my brothers shooting truck (on a small remote private land permission in deepest Cornwall) when plod turned up to ask what I was doing there late one night. Took about an hour trying to explain why my Sako Quad .22LR action had a 17hmr barrel with a different serial number in it. They made several phone calls and got nobody to speak to at about 11pm. They werent 100% convinced about the swappable barrel and calibre - and me having comprehensive insurance for a taxi and eventually repeatedly insisted I leave the site: It occurred to me they would stop me again on a public road to ticket me at least so I agreed I'd drive up into the wider car park over the brow of a hill - ostensibly to follow them out to the highway - they were at that time blocking the narrow exit.

To shorten the story I left via another exit over the brow that they were not aware of...  :-)

They didn't get to witness me driving the short distance back to my brothers house on the public highway. They apparently drove by later but didnt knock, maybe because it was after midnight with no lights on.

It subsequently became apparent the insurance industry had stripped down 'fully comprehensive' policies to just 'comprehensive' by removing some of its extras to get reduced comparison website prices. I had not been aware of the changes and was in fact innocently guilty of driving without insurance. That was a very lucky escape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would put money on they will have paid up under section 151 of the Road Traffic Act  

This would also work in respect of your mate being insured incorrectly but it was probably easier to persue your insurance as your vehicle was involved (even though you were not)

whikst not an expert I should think there maybe a case for your insurance company using the above to reclaim from your mate thus putting him in the position of satisfying the costs  

 

hopefully the ombudsman can advise you further 

Edited by ph5172

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dave-G said:

subsequently became apparent the insurance industry had stripped down 'fully comprehensive' policies to just 'comprehensive' by removing some of its extras to get reduced comparison website prices

They've stripped it down mainly to stop people insuring one (cheaper) car, and then driving their 'mates' more expensive to insure car. That's really their main motor. 

But also to make it an added extra, like you say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rewulf said:

They've stripped it down mainly to stop people insuring one (cheaper) car, and then driving their 'mates' more expensive to insure car. That's really their main motor. 

But also to make it an added extra, like you say. 

i believe you are correct - and loads of cabbies exploited the driving another car aspect too apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a shame for you Edd and while I get your frustration, I think it is right that your insurance company has paid out, as the one party in all this that seems to have been forgotten is the person whose car was hit by your mate and based on what you have said I do not believe they or their insurance company should be out of pocket while this is resolved

Out of interest if your policy is a fleet policy would he not be covered under this as you have authorised him to drive or would he have to work for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, button said:

This is a shame for you Edd and while I get your frustration, I think it is right that your insurance company has paid out, as the one party in all this that seems to have been forgotten is the person whose car was hit by your mate and based on what you have said I do not believe they or their insurance company should be out of pocket while this is resolved

Out of interest if your policy is a fleet policy would he not be covered under this as you have authorised him to drive or would he have to work for you?

The vehicle in question is/was not on my fleet policy. The business pays the insurance but the van in question is my own and not the company's.

 

Edd

Edited by eddoakley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...