# Collision with uninsured driver



## killerkavo (29 Feb 2008)

A brief explanation of the incident to start with - I was involved in a collision on Monday morning - nothing too major, but sufficient damage to both cars to warrant a claim. At the time of the accident he accepted liability as he was driving on the wrong side of the road. We exchanged our insurance details etc. and mobile numbers. I contacted the Gardai and my insurance company, and as it turns out, the insurance company were able to ascertain that the other driver was driving his girlfriend's car and he was not a named driver on her policy. The Gardai later called to my place of work to take the details, and I provided them with a diagram of what had happened. They weren't hugely interested though, most likely because nobody was injured. So the other driver rang me a couple of times that morning, he apologised for the incident, repeating he had been on the wrong side of the road, and then his girlfriend also came on the phone and apologised, and they said they would get both cars sorted on her insurance. I didn't mention to them that I was aware he wasn't a named driver.

So after a couple of days, I was left a voicemail from my insurer, informing me that although he wasn't covered to drive the car, I was being held liable for the collision - no further explanation given. Now the uninsured driver and his girlfriend are claiming that she was in the car at the time of the collision, so without an independent witness, the insurer is taking it as two against one I suppose. After he having admitted to me twice that he was in the wrong by driving on the wrong side of the road, and also finding out he's uninsured, and then the two of them coming up with these lies about her being present at the time, it's turned into a real nightmare very quickly. Could anyone advise as to my next step? What happens in the case of insured drivers vs uninsured drivers? Is it just tough luck on the insured driver?

Thanks for your help

killerkavo


----------



## rmelly (1 Mar 2008)

Any CCTV footage you could retrieve? Has she given a statement to the Gardai? Any chance you could prove otherwise e.g. she might have been clocked in at work.

It seems strange that the Gardai are not interested in an uninsured driver - did you mention this to them? - maybe re-iterate this point to them, see if they will press charges, at which point she may realise that continuing to say she was driving may leave her open to perjury charges if it went to court...

You're always better off calling the Gardai in these circumstances to cover yourself, regardless of responsibility, as you never know what the other person will subsequently claim.


----------



## taponavillus (1 Mar 2008)

go immediately to the gardai,keep any messages on your phone etc. text him and ask why he is claiming his girlfriend was in the car. keep his reply if he tells the truth.you could also tape him if you spoke to him vial your mobile.


----------



## csirl (3 Mar 2008)

Might be better to deal with your own insurance company and the Gardai only. I wouldnt be getting into a "....you were driving etc....." argument with the driver who has already proven himself to be dishonest. Regular contact may also give the impression (which they will claim re: you having his number - see below) that you know them personally rather than are dealing with a driver you dont know via official channels.

Give you version of events to the insurance company & Gardai including a full description of the occupant. Be firm on the fact of who was driving. You obtained his name and mobile number at the scene which should prove he was there otherwise how would you have gotten the name and number of someone that you have never met (as he claims girlfriend was driving)?


----------



## ney001 (3 Mar 2008)

usually in the case of an uninsured driver the case is directed to the MIBI, he was uninsured and it doesn't matter whether his girlfriend was with him or not.  I think if you take an action against the insurance company involved they will quickly refer it to the MIBI.  The MIBI will usually then recover their costs from the uninsured driver.


----------



## csirl (3 Mar 2008)

> it doesn't matter whether his girlfriend was with him or not.


 
Just to clear up. Is he claiming that he and his girlfriend were both in the car? Or his girlfriend was in the car instead of him?


----------



## aircobra19 (3 Mar 2008)

I have no experience of dealin with an uninsured driver. But having said that I have experience in the past where the insurance company, (and this could be just one or two people in the insurance compnay) have decided to take the easy way out and claim against the policy thats the least cost and hassle to them. Especially where one party, usually the one at fault hounds and badgers the other parties insurance company to pay out. (that was my experience).

I could be wrong. But as far as I know. Gardai can't comment on an accident they weren't witness too. Occupants in either car cannot act as a witness either. What people say at the scene or afterwards isn't admissible either. So unless you can prove the location on the road, by photos, video or tyre marks. Its going to be up to the insurance assessor who will examine both cars and decide who is to blame. In my experience (where there no evidence, no witness'es) this can often end up being ruled as each party pays their own. 

I would get onto the insurance company (on the phone AND in writing) and demand to the full details and refuse to accept the liability for this. Get them to accept there are no witness'es, no evidence etc.


----------



## aircobra19 (3 Mar 2008)

csirl said:


> Just to clear up. Is he claiming that he and his girlfriend were both in the car? Or his girlfriend was in the car instead of him?



I don't reckon it will  matter if you can't prove it. These days you need to keep a camera in the car, and take photos of the car in situ before either
 party moves the car. Or the people leave, or witness "appear" afterwards. 

OP - if you swapped details, you'll have the boyfriend details. How would you have them if he wasn't driving? If you'd called the cops to the scene they'd have taken his details aswell.


----------



## shesells (3 Mar 2008)

Has it occurred to anyone that while the driver may not have been a named driver on his gf's policy, he could have his own policy with open driving?


----------



## aircobra19 (3 Mar 2008)

shesells said:


> Has it occurred to anyone that while the driver may not have been a named driver on his gf's policy, he could have his own policy with open driving?



Open driving is rare enough these days and a messer like this is unlikely to have it.


----------



## Murt10 (3 Mar 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> Open driving is rare enough these days and a messer like this is unlikely to have it.



I'm covered (3rd party only I think) to drive any other car provided I have the owners consent.

I thought this was the norm.


Murt


----------



## shesells (3 Mar 2008)

I thought so too. I even had open driving when I only had a provisional license!


----------



## mathepac (4 Mar 2008)

Murt10 said:


> I'm covered (3rd party only I think) to drive any other car provided I have the owners consent.
> 
> I thought this was the norm.
> 
> ...


I know it used to be, I had it for years and didn't even know.  It became an option a while ago and like the true meanie I am I cancelled to save money.


----------



## aircobra19 (4 Mar 2008)

Open driving isn't driving other cars 3rd party. It means your insurance covers anyone to drive your car. Often used for business where theres more than one driver on the same vehicle. 

Driving other cars 3rd party, is optional and many policies don't have it. Which people have discovered to their cost when assuming they have it without checking their policy. 

I would very unusal to have open driving on a provisional, even 3rd party on other cars would be rare I'm guessing. It makes no sense to offer either to provisional drivers IMO.


----------



## RS2K (4 Mar 2008)

Open driving means anyone can drive the insured's car with permission. It doesn't mean you can drive any car with comp. cover.

If it did we would all buy and insure a small cheap car, and drive around in something more exotic.


----------



## smokeybear (4 Mar 2008)

I have open driving on my policy & had it when I was on a provisional licence. It means I am covered 3rd party to drive any other insured car once I have the owners consent. I'm not paying extra for this.


----------



## aircobra19 (4 Mar 2008)

smokeybear said:


> I have open driving on my policy & had it when I was on a provisional licence. It means I am covered 3rd party to drive any other insured car once I have the owners consent. I'm not paying extra for this.



Thats not open driving. Unless your name is Kitt.


----------



## shesells (5 Mar 2008)

Apologies if I got the terminology wrong but the basic fact is the same, my policies have always covered 3rd party driving on vehicles not owned by me but driven with the consent of the owner. And yes I had this on my policy before I got a full licence.


----------



## aircobra19 (5 Mar 2008)

I don't know what point is being made here about people having 3rd party insurance. The OP was clear enough. 



killerkavo said:


> ....I was left a voicemail from my insurer, informing me that although he wasn't covered to drive the car,...


----------



## shesells (5 Mar 2008)

killerkavo said:


> the insurance company were able to ascertain that the other driver was driving his girlfriend's car and he was not a named driver on her policy.


 
This is what led me to think the other driver may have had cover on his own policy


----------



## aircobra19 (5 Mar 2008)

If he had his own policy would we even be talking about this?


----------

