Car crashed through Garden Wall - Who is liable?

jkgray

This is not an MIB case. The MIB is a fund of last resort where there is no insurer or the driver is untraced.

Here you would have to sue the at fault er and obtain judgment against them and then (assuming the driver did not pay) seek to enforce that judgment against the owner's insurers under their obligations under s.151 Road Traffic Act.

This is not a straight forward case for a layman and you will need legal advice if your insurer will not deal.

gerfus

dacouch wrote: »

The Motor Insurance Bureau would not be involved in this case as there is an insurance policy in place on the car, as the driver has stolen the car and been identified then the Insurer of the car are liable.

Got in touch with the cars insurer and they informed that his car insurance will cover it. Even though he is even denying all knowledge of the car even being stolen and that it was in an accident??????

They are sending out a surveyor to assess the damage and I have to get a quote for the rebuild of the wall.

jkgray

gerfus wrote: »

Got in touch with the cars insurer and they informed that his car insurance will cover it. Even though he is even denying all knowledge of the car even being stolen and that it was in an accident??????

They are sending out a surveyor to assess the damage and I have to get a quote for the rebuild of the wall.

This is not their charity, as I set out above under the road traffic act they are made liable for any accident involving a vehicle upon which they have provided cover at the material time.

The purpose is to shift the problem of drunk, uninsured driver, etc to the insurer to recover their outlay from that person rather than the victim being left high and dry.

By paying out now they are simply keeping the costs they will have to pay down as if you obtained a judgment against the guilty driver and then enforced this against them, they would be liable for the costs of the litgation as well.

Yorkie1

As previously stated, the MIB provides cover in two separate situations:
Uninsured driver
Untraced driver

http://www.mib.org.uk/Frequently+Asked+Questions/en/Default.htm

The driver here has been traced, the question is whether he was insured. Doubtless the car owner will have told his insurers, as well as the police, that the car was nicked by his friend. And therefore the insurers will refuse to pay out. From the FAQ page linked above, it seems that a judgment against the friend would be needed before the MIB would pay out there.

I must say that previous anecdotal experience shows that the MIB will go to any and all lengths to avoid paying out. If you think that using their services might be necessary, I'd recommend you read their site now - as there are very tight timescales for lodging claims if I recall correctly.

That all being said, the best route has to be to contact your house insurance.

vaio

Yorkie1 wrote: »

As previously stated, the MIB provides cover in two separate situations:
Uninsured driver
Untraced driver

http://www.mib.org.uk/Frequently+Asked+Questions/en/Default.htm

The driver here has been traced, the question is whether he was insured. Doubtless the car owner will have told his insurers, as well as the police, that the car was nicked by his friend. And therefore the insurers will refuse to pay out. From the FAQ page linked above, it seems that a judgment against the friend would be needed before the MIB would pay out there.

I must say that previous anecdotal experience shows that the MIB will go to any and all lengths to avoid paying out. If you think that using their services might be necessary, I'd recommend you read their site now - as there are very tight timescales for lodging claims if I recall correctly.

That all being said, the best route has to be to contact your house insurance.

about as wrong as it's possible to get

The car's insurance company are liable under s151 (as posted in #12 above) and have accepted this and are dealing with it (as posted in #13)

Yorkie1

Missed the detail in #13, thanks for pointing that out.

katehesk

dacouch wrote: »

The Motor Insurance Bureau would not be involved in this case as there is an insurance policy in place on the car, as the driver has stolen the car and been identified then the Insurer of the car are liable.

My car was stolen, crashed, then dumped in a residential area where it had damaged another vehicle. I was on my way home from Mexico at the time, and was never liable for the damage to the other vehicles that I am aware of. Although the car was stolen/recovered i lost all my no claims anyway (2 years, the time I had been driving).

Shambler

katehesk wrote: »

My car was stolen, crashed, then dumped in a residential area where it had damaged another vehicle. I was on my way home from Mexico at the time, and was never liable for the damage to the other vehicles that I am aware of. Although the car was stolen/recovered i lost all my no claims anyway (2 years, the time I had been driving).

What a crazy world we live in

jkgray

katehesk wrote: »

My car was stolen, crashed, then dumped in a residential area where it had damaged another vehicle. I was on my way home from Mexico at the time, and was never liable for the damage to the other vehicles that I am aware of. Although the car was stolen/recovered i lost all my no claims anyway (2 years, the time I had been driving).

Your insurer would have paid for the damage to the other vehicles (due to their liability under s.151 RTA).

A lot of people don't understand that 'no claims bonus' means what it says - if there is no claim against the policy then a bonus is paid. It does not matter whether the claim resulted from blameworthy actions on your behalf or not. If the insurer has to pay out a single penny you don't get the bonus.

It's a harsh result but that's the way it works.

dacouch

jkgray wrote: »

Your insurer would have paid for the damage to the other vehicles (due to their liability under s.151 RTA).

A lot of people don't understand that 'no claims bonus' means what it says - if there is no claim against the policy then a bonus is paid. It does not matter whether the claim resulted from blameworthy actions on your behalf or not. If the insurer has to pay out a single penny you don't get the bonus.

It's a harsh result but that's the way it works.

The Insurers are only liable for damage caused by a stolen car if the thief is identified, if the thief is unidentified the third parties would need to claim from the MIB