Car insurance, can I claim?

M

mimi22

Guest
I recently had an accident where another car drove into the back of mine while standing at traffic lights. There is 1200 Euro damage to the car and I was unable to work for 1 week with a concussion. The car was still insured through the previous owner, and I was insured as a name driver on my partner's comprehensive insurance. We only found out afterwards that it is only the policy holder that is insured to drive other cars, not the name driver (in my opinion this isn't so clear in the insurance policy). Can I still claim through the other guy's insurance or not? The accident was 100% his fault and he accepts this.
 
I dont think you have a leg to stand on with the insurance. You were not covered to drive this car, so therefore insurance will not pay out. You can also be hit with driving with no insurance and penalty points. Did your partner inform his/her insurance company of a change of vehicle when you bought/collected the car? If not you are not insured.
 
I am not sure what you mean by this:
"Did your partner inform his/her insurance company of a change of vehicle when you bought/collected the car"
My partner still has his own car, so there was no change of vehicle. HE would have been insured to drive my new car, but I wasn't (as I was just a name driver on his insurance for his car). I know I made a mistake not checking the insurance policy carefully before driving, but I had no fault at this accident at all!
 
mimi22 said:
I know I made a mistake not checking the insurance policy carefully before driving, but I had no fault at this accident at all!
Click to expand...

In fact, if you had no insurance then the accident is 100% your fault as you shouldn't have been there in the first place. People fail to check whether they are covered to drive cars all the time. This is an expensive lesson.
 
mimi22 said:
... I know I made a mistake not checking the insurance policy carefully before driving, but I had no fault at this accident at all!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it was a major mistake and it sounds like you had no insurance cover at the time of the accident.

Pursuing a claim under these circumstances will be difficult. If the other party makes any offer of payment outside of the insurance channels, I suggest you look at it seriously.
 
Is there any point in getting further legal advice or will I just pay up and be glad that nothing worse happened and I am not being sued for uninsured driving? Does the fact that the car itself was insured not play any role in this at all?
 
By all means get all the legal advice you need and can afford, but remember that insurance policies usually follow drivers and not cars.

Based on the information you gave above it sounds like you were not insured, but check with the previous owner of the car who foolishly may not have cancelled his insurance.
 
Even if the previous owner hadn't cancelled the insurance, it doesn't mean that the OP was insured to drive it. If the other driver is willing to make any payment to you without going through insurance, as mathepac has said, I would just gladly take it and consider myself to be very lucky.
 
mimi22 said:
I recently had an accident where another car drove into the back of mine while standing at traffic lights. I had just bought the car the same day and was on my way home from the previous owner when the accident happened. There is 1000 Euro damage to the car and I was unable to work for 1 week with a concussion. The car was still insured through the previous owner, and I was insured as a name driver on my partner's comprehensive insurance. We only found out afterwards that it is only the policy holder that is insured to drive other cars, not the name driver (in my opinion this isn't so clear in the insurance policy). Can I still claim through the other guy's insurance or not? The accident was 100% his fault and he accepts this.
Click to expand...

The fact that you had no insurance is in the circumstances outlined by you is irrelevent.
If the other driver is at fault you are still totally within your rights to pursue a claim against him/her.

Just because you wer not insured does not absolve the other dirvers liability to you.
 
You could also check with the dealer (presuming you bought the vehicle from a dealer) to see if he had motor trade insurance. Some policies allow customers to drive their vehicles for demonstrative use on the day of the purchase. It might be a bit tentative but its worth checking out. If you were covered under their insurance than you could submit a claim against the 3rd party without fear of being prosecuted.
 
mimi22 said:
The car was still insured through the previous owner, and I was insured as a name driver on my partner's comprehensive insurance.
Click to expand...


How was the car insured by the previous owner even after they had sold it to you?
They had no insurable interest in the car. :confused:
 
Every body is reaching here!! Correct me if i'm wrong but to summarise the OP bought a car. She doesnt have her own insurance, she is only a named driver on her other halfs policy. She didnt arrange her own insurance policy for some strange reason (seeing as oh wasnt getting rid of his car). She seemed to think she was covered by Driving Other Cars as a named driver which she isnt. From what i gather she bought it from a private individual so motor trade doesnt come into it, and unless you're well in with owner I cant see them wanting to involve themselves in the matter.

From a liability stand point the other driver was at fault and should have to pay for the damage. But whether another company will pay out is different matter as she wasn't insured and was effectively breaking the law!
 
peteb said:
Every body is reaching here!! Correct me if i'm wrong but to summarise the OP bought a car. She doesnt have her own insurance, she is only a named driver on her other halfs policy. She didnt arrange her own insurance policy for some strange reason (seeing as oh wasnt getting rid of his car). She seemed to think she was covered by Driving Other Cars as a named driver which she isnt. From what i gather she bought it from a private individual so motor trade doesnt come into it, and unless you're well in with owner I cant see them wanting to involve themselves in the matter.

From a liability stand point the other driver was at fault and should have to pay for the damage. But whether another company will pay out is different matter as she wasn't insured and was effectively breaking the law!
Click to expand...

You are looking to two seperate issues and merging them into one.
Yes the driver can be done for having no insurance.

No the third party insurers cannot decline the claim as a result of the no previous insurance.-That is a red herring and totally irelevant.
 
Ed054 said:
You are looking to two seperate issues and merging them into one.
Yes the driver can be done for having no insurance.

No the third party insurers cannot decline the claim as a result of the no previous insurance.-That is a red herring and totally irelevant.
Click to expand...

I know what you are saying that TP insurers are always obliged to pay out claims. But it goes against public policy i.e. the injured party was uninsured in a situation where they are obliged to have insurance. You've done the exams Ed!
 
peteb said:
I know what you are saying that TP insurers are always obliged to pay out claims. But it goes against public policy i.e. the injured party was uninsured in a situation where they are obliged to have insurance. You've done the exams Ed!
Click to expand...

Look if I was in the situation as described and it was my car that hit the uninsured car I would be very upset that my insurers were going to pay out.
But one thing that you have to remember is you cannot choose your victims ther was a case in the 1930s which is used in case law where a motorist hit someone with a very thin skull who suffered serious injuries they argued in court that if the person did not have such a thin skull they would not have been as badly injured the courts threw out the case stating that you cannot choose your victim.

We may think that it is unfair but it still does not absolve the third party and their insurers from their liability
 
I agree with Ed054 in this instance. This is a straightforward claim against a third party in respect of injury arising through their negligence. The fact that she was uninsured is irrelevant. (This could possibly be likened to the situation where a burglar could sue a property owner/occupier prior to the passing of the Occupiers Liability Act. )

She is liable to prosecution but that is a different issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top