Hit a pedestrian

lisyloo

Whether she has money or not is none of our business.

If she doesn't have any money (and no insurance) then you won't get it, simple as that. If she is a housewife for example then she may have no personal income, benefits or money of her own (unlikely but possible).

For this reason it's a legal requirement that car drivers are insured, however it is NOT a requirement for pedestrians or cyclists to have any insurance.

There are risks with suing her personally - costs, time off etc.

Can you clarify whether you purchased the optional legal insurance with your motor policy?

Personally I'd explore the insurance options first, before taking it on personally.
You pay then for a service and they should provide that service.
You have 6 years, so you have time, although witness evidence, memoties etc. do fade, so proceed in a timely fashion but no need to panic.

lisyloo

Be aware that should you win, your motor insurance would not recoup your "uuninsured" losses.
So they will recoup the car damage but not the time off work.

You can try to add it onto the claim directly, but ideally you need to have the optional legal insurance to cover the extras outside of your insurance.

pokopoko

Yes, we do have purchased the optional legal assistance.

lisyloo

I think you are doing the right thing in questioning your insurer.

Quentin

pokopoko wrote: »

We've sent a letter to our insurance company. It's up to them. We have no intention of sueing her personally.

They will take the same view - if she has no money, then sueing is a waste of time/money. (So if she has no money, they won't sue, irrespective of whether they think they will win)

lisyloo

if she has no money, then sueing is a waste of time/money

But if she has insurance e.g. home insurance covering 3rd parties against her negligence, then her personal financial situation doesn't come into it does it?

Do you mean if she has no money AND no insurance then sueing is a waste of time/money?

Jackapoo

lisyloo wrote: »

But if she has insurance e.g. home insurance covering 3rd parties against her negligence, then her personal financial situation doesn't come into it does it?

Do you mean if she has no money AND no insurance then sueing is a waste of time/money?

From the details provided then a liability claim is out the window, you are never going to prove that she was 100% negligent.

lisyloo

Ah yes, I think someone has explained something about this to me before.
Is it something to do with that type of insurance working on an "indeminity basis".
I don't think I can explain it very well.
But I think what you are saying is there is a big difference between 3rd party liability in general insurance/legal terms and the way car insurance works.
I don't know the correct terms - but indemnity spring to mind.
This would be very helpful I think if someone can explain this properly.

gordikin

What if the pedestrian claims they did look (and didn't see the car coming) and then stepped out on to the road???

lisyloo

What if the pedestrian claims they did look (and didn't see the car coming) and then stepped out on to the road???

Then I'd say she's liable as she made a mistake and morally she should pay up, but 95% of people would not pay up voluntarily.
People appear to recall different version of events generally in their favour.