Car hit from behind - Driver has no Insurance

thenudeone

I hate to get in the way of the fight between The Turner and McNeff, I think I have learned something about the RTA today and want to share it with you.

Whilst the law clearly says that as long as name and address details are exchanged, you do not need to produce your certificate of insurance after an accident unless someone (other than you) is injured, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170;

It also seems to say here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/154 that if anyone makes a claim against you (which should be covered by compulsory insurance), you must say whether you have insurance and if so, give details of it.

If I have read this correctly, you are both partly right.:T and the law is a little confusing.:)

vaio

Freefall wrote: »

If he has insurance for driving the car then of course.

However, it gets more complicated if he is not insured. To cut a long story short, in such circumstances, it could be:
(a) the RK's/Owner's/Normal-driver's insurers;
(b) the Motor Insurer's Bureau (MIB); or
(c) RK's/Owner's/Normal-driver's insurers as "Article 75 Insurers" under the MIB scheme;

that pay out the claim. However, in the case of property damage for (b) and (c) only for any sum over £600 (iirc). Best bet is to phone Help Hire, Drive Assist, Accident Exchange or your legal-expense insurers for advice.

Yep, but I think I'm right in saying that a, b & c above all rely on a judgement being obtained against the driver hence the driver is the one to sue


Pretty sure there is no lower limit on MIB/Art75/s151 claims either, I think there used to be a £300 excess on property with the MIB

The_Turner

thenudeone wrote: »

I hate to get in the way of the fight between The Turner and McNeff, I think I have learned something about the RTA today and want to share it with you.

Whilst the law clearly says that as long as name and address details are exchanged, you do not need to produce your certificate of insurance after an accident unless someone (other than you) is injured, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170;

It also seems to say here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/154 that if anyone makes a claim against you (which should be covered by compulsory insurance), you must say whether you have insurance and if so, give details of it.

If I have read this correctly, you are both partly right.:T and the law is a little confusing.:)

Nice spot but did you see the or?

You don't actually need insurance.

vaio

thenudeone wrote: »

I hate to get in the way of the fight between The Turner and McNeff, I think I have learned something about the RTA today and want to share it with you.

Whilst the law clearly says that as long as name and address details are exchanged, you do not need to produce your certificate of insurance after an accident unless someone (other than you) is injured, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170;

It also seems to say here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/154 that if anyone makes a claim against you (which should be covered by compulsory insurance), you must say whether you have insurance and if so, give details of it.

If I have read this correctly, you are both partly right.:T and the law is a little confusing.:)

I suppose s170 is at the time of the accident (aimed at detecting uninsured drivers) and s154 is after the accident when a claim has been notified (aimed at making sure claims aren't unnecessarily delayed)

Different mischief to be combated hence different sections of the RTA and all balanced against our legal right not to have to carry assorted documentation at all times. (although recent governments do seem intent on eroding that right)

thenudeone

The_Turner wrote: »

Nice spot but did you see the or?

You don't actually need insurance.

Not if you have £500k to spare to deposit with the Accountant General of the Senior Courts, or are a county council, an NHS Trust, a Police Authority etc. etc.

For us mere mortals, we do need insurance.

Freefall

vaio wrote: »

Yep, but I think I'm right in saying that a, b & c above all rely on a judgement being obtained against the driver hence the driver is the one to sue


Pretty sure there is no lower limit on MIB/Art75/s151 claims either, I think there used to be a £300 excess on property with the MIB

I am not sure if Art75/MIB claims have got rid of the excess, I know it used to be £600 on property damage but may well have changed.

You are correct s151 RTA requires a judgement against driver so requires knowing the identity of the driver. Usually insurers just pay out though, if liability is clear AND the driver is identifiable (so if push come to shuff, could be sued). Why waste money on court claims? They may seek an assignment from the innocent party or an indemnification from the guilty party but probably, in practice, do not expect to recover their outlay.

As to MIB, they have an "uidentified driver" scheme as well as an "uninsured driver" scheme. So if the insurers escape liability on the basis of non identity then MIB would have to pick up the tab.

I forget about Art 75 but the idea of that is that the usual insurer for the vehicle steps into the shoes of MIB and pays out on it's behalf (if there are proceedings then they are usually brought against MIB, IIRC, although the insurer would obv be underwriting it all). So as to whether or not Art 75 is applicable or not, it doesn't matter to the OP - they still both mean that someone else is picking up the tab and the payout is calculated the same.

LudaMusser

The_Turner wrote: »

If there is no injury he is not required to provide insurance details.

So if somebody ran into the back of my car and it ended up on its roof, a total write-off, as long as I`m not injured it`s totally okay for the other party to not provide insurance details and be on their merry way..

WAKE UP

If you are involved in a car accident and there is damage to either vehicle you need insurance details. I would take photos where possible and also get the other vehicles registration incase they give you fake contact info. If they clearly had no road tax displayed I would ring the police. It`s an offence to have road tax but to NOT have it displayed.

I think OP handled the situation pretty well esp with the yobs sticking their noses in. You did well to walk away with £100

thenudeone

LudaMusser wrote: »

So if somebody ran into the back of my car and it ended up on its roof, a total write-off, as long as I`m not injured it`s totally okay for the other party to not provide insurance details and be on their merry way..

WAKE UP

You can rant and rave all you want but THE LAW is described in my post above.

The law does NOT require a certificate of insurance to be produced unless the accident involves injury; but it also states that a driver must state whether they are insured and give the details if requested (but not necessarily at the scene).

I don't really care whether you think the law is good or bad, and neither will the courts or the police.

Flyboy152

zayn wrote: »

Hi All,
My Clean Mazda 3 Sport 56 plate, Got hit yesterday from the rear by a Van driver who was not paying attention. It was a very deep scratch and slight dent to the rear bumper. I asked the driver what he was doing and he said he did not understand how it happened. Anyway i asked for his insurance details but he refused to give them to me. I asked why and he said i may put a false claim on him. I decided to push this further but he refused. I decided i would call the police, they were useless and said just exchange details as no-one is injured. Eventually a crowd of lazy youths come along and crowd me asking why don't i let the man go??? i told them to move on, as it it not there concern. This continued for 15 minutes and eventually i just told the man. It is obvious you don't have insurance, van had no road tax on screen either, just give me £200 and i will be off. Intimidation again by the youth around this man and eventually i took £100 gave a receipt and walked away.

Was i right to walk away?? what would you do when encountered by a driver who obviously has no insurance and cannot be trusted to give real details ??


It ****ed me right off as it is because of this the premiums are through the roof now, What punishment will this man get? I believe nothing ???

When these youths turned up you should have called the police, telling that you feared for your safety. It would also have been useful for you to have told the police that you colld smell drink on the driver. With all of that said however, there is no legal requirement for another driver to give you any insurance details at all; just their name and address.

Flyboy152

LudaMusser wrote: »

So if somebody ran into the back of my car and it ended up on its roof, a total write-off, as long as I`m not injured it`s totally okay for the other party to not provide insurance details and be on their merry way..

WAKE UP

If you are involved in a car accident and there is damage to either vehicle you need insurance details. I would take photos where possible and also get the other vehicles registration incase they give you fake contact info. If they clearly had no road tax displayed I would ring the police. It`s an offence to have road tax but to NOT have it displayed.

I think OP handled the situation pretty well esp with the yobs sticking their noses in. You did well to walk away with £100

There is no legal compulsion to do so. There is a legal requirement to have insurance, but there is no such requirement for any driver to exchange them.