Defendent had several previous accidents

And for MOB post. Yes I was insured in my own car. Therefore paying my contributation towards the MIBI. The owner of the other car was negligent in the fact that he failed to pay his insurance.
Click to expand...

Surely it is your responsibility to ensure that the car in which you are driving is covered by insurance. Ignorance is not a defence.
 
MrMan said:
Surely it is your responsibility to ensure that the car in which you are driving is covered by insurance. Ignorance is not a defence.
Click to expand...

Surely a person would assume a car was insured by the owner as I owner has just step out of the the said car 2 minutes previous to me getting into it!
 
My reading of this is:

OP was driving his mates car and was uninsured.
The defendant was driving his own car and was insured.
OP claims that defendant pulled out in front of him and caused OP to hit him.
OP is claiming from MIBI despite the fact that the other driver was insured -op believes that the MIBI will cover him as he was the uninsured driver who was caused to collide with another driver. What I don't understand is if the other driver is at fault (by the findings of the gardai) why is OP suing the MIBI when he should be suing the defendants insurance company (that is if the defendant is indeed liable).
 
DavyJones said:
So you were driving unisured and crashed into somebody? Surely that is illegal and you shoudn't have been on the road.
Click to expand...

It was illegal for the person who owned the car not to have it insured. He was the legal owner of the car in the accident
 
John joe said:
Surely a person would assume a car was insured by the owner as I owner has just step out of the the said car 2 minutes previous to me getting into it!
Click to expand...

You shouldn't assume anything in relation to insurance - if you were as experienced and safe a driver as you believe yourself to be you would know this!. If as you allege the other driver is so unsafe can you confirm whether or not HE had insurance??
 

The defendant didn't have any insurance that why I'm sueing the MIBI as they are the insurance for people that don't insure their car.
 
John joe said:
Surely a person would assume a car was insured by the owner as I owner has just step out of the the said car 2 minutes previous to me getting into it!
Click to expand...

I don't think assumptions stand up in court, they tend to deal in fact in which case you were driving uninsured and were breaking the law.
 
I think I see where you are coming from. I am far from a legal expert but I usually know when I'm beat. and if I were in your shoes I'd feel pretty beaten. I for one don't think you have much of a case.

Have you looked up similar cases? has anyone been successfull in this type of action?
 
also we don't operate under a system whereby cars are insured as is the case in certain countries, here it is the driver rather than the car which is to be insured, it is up to each driver to ensure that they themselves are property insured. Insurance attaches to the driver rather than the car
 
John joe said:
The defendant didn't have any insurance that why I'm sueing the MIBI as they are the insurance for people that don't insure their car.
Click to expand...

okay that wasn't clear from previous posts - so you are suing the MIBI because the guy that caused your accident didn't have insurance - so basically two uninsured drivers collided with each other is that correct??
 

Yes there was a simular case handed down in 2007 where the plaintiff was cover for their serious injuries through the MIBI.
 
did your own insurance not cover you to drive the car you had the accident in 3rd party?
 
ney001 said:
okay that wasn't clear from previous posts - so you are suing the MIBI because the guy that caused your accident didn't have insurance - so basically two uninsured drivers collided with each other is that correct??
Click to expand...

Correct!
 
John joe said:
Correct!
Click to expand...

okay so why do you need to prove that the guy is an unsafe driver and caused your accident - surely by virtue of the fact that he is uninsured you won't need to prove anything about him?. Did the guards reckon that he was the cause of the accident?
 
ney001 said:
As far as I know it would - as previously stated you insure the driver not the car so you would be covered 3rd party.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I am insured to drive my cars because my name is linked to the regs. That doesn't mean I can drive anybody elses car, surely?. What is stopping me from sticking a top end BMW in my grannies name and insuring me in a 1.0L micra, for example and then just driving the BMW around cos I'm insured.
 

Don't know about different cars etc but I know that I am insured 3rd party on my partner's vehicle. However, I do know of somebody who assumed he was insured 3rd party and took his friends jeep, small crash happened and it transpired that insurance wouldn't cover him in a jeep (i.e he was covered 3rd party if he had been driving a car)
 


I would also guess that the car in question might have to have an insurance policy already on it. For example My granny would have to be insured on the BMW before my insurance was valid, possibly?
 
Third Party only covers injury or loss suffered by others as a result of your driving.

Comprehensive Insurance may cover you to drive other cars but only as much as third party insurance, always check the details of your policy.

Further information about car insurance can be found on the Motor Insurance page of the www.itsyourmoney.ie site.

In the case of the OP it does not appear that he has a valid claim against the MIBI. It would also seem that he made no effort to check with his insurance company that he was covered to drive his friend's car or to transfer his insurance temporarily to allow him to drive the car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register