Very Minor Car Accident - Is settling outside insurance Legal??

glentoran99

let insurance deal with it, simple, thats what you pay it for

glentoran99

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Legally you sue the driver not the car nor the insurer. If you cannot identify the driver at the time of the accident there is no legal obligation for the insurer of the vehicle to pay out.

Telephone numbers arent required but a name certainly is and an address is highly beneficial as otherwise you issue proceedings against the person at the keeper of the car's address but if they turn round saying they've never heard of A N Other etc then you probably wont get anywhere

Nonsense, going by that logic if a driver gives you a false name you are screwed

InsideInsurance

glentoran99 wrote: »

Nonsense, going by that logic if a driver gives you a false name you are screwed

And you can be.... go read the RTA, the insurer of the vehicle only as an obligation to settle a judgement. If you cannot find the driver you cannot get a judgement.

The MIB is there with the Untraced Driver Agreement to deal with hit and runs/ false names etc where the driver cannot be identified

glentoran99

InsideInsurance wrote: »

And you can be.... go read the RTA, the insurer of the vehicle only as an obligation to settle a judgement. If you cannot find the driver you cannot get a judgement.

The MIB is there with the Untraced Driver Agreement to deal with hit and runs/ false names etc where the driver cannot be identified

Must remember to give a false name then if im ever involved in an accident, means my insurance wont be affected,

Of course the registration number isnt linked to the owner of the vehicle who in turn has an obligation to provide who was driving at the time, unless it was reported stolen prior to the accident

you cant simply say, "sorry officer i dont know who was driving my car at the time"

InsideInsurance

glentoran99 wrote: »

Must remember to give a false name then if im ever involved in an accident, means my insurance wont be affected,

Of course the registration number isnt linked to the owner of the vehicle who in turn has an obligation to provide who was driving at the time, unless it was reported stolen prior to the accident

you cant simply say, "sorry officer i dont know who was driving my car at the time"

Of cause you then possibly have a criminal offence of not exchanging details/ giving false details and once your real details are known then a judgement can be gotten and your insurers become liable.

Doesnt have to be reported stolen prior to the accident, had several cases where the first thing the PH knew about their car having been nicked was the 6am knock on the door from the police saying their car had been involved in an RTA and found abandoned and torched a few miles from the scene.

So as I said, if the driver cannot be traced to have a judgement made against them the insurer of the vehicle has no obligation to settle the claim and the MIB untraced driver agreement is there as the backstop.

If you want to use this as a way to "protect your insurance" you probably want to have some false plates on the car in addition to you giving a false name.

glentoran99

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Of cause you then possibly have a criminal offence of not exchanging details/ giving false details and once your real details are known then a judgement can be gotten and your insurers become liable.

Doesnt have to be reported stolen prior to the accident, had several cases where the first thing the PH knew about their car having been nicked was the 6am knock on the door from the police saying their car had been involved in an RTA and found abandoned and torched a few miles from the scene.

So as I said, if the driver cannot be traced to have a judgement made against them the insurer of the vehicle has no obligation to settle the claim and the MIB untraced driver agreement is there as the backstop.

If you want to use this as a way to "protect your insurance" you probably want to have some false plates on the car in addition to you giving a false name.

Of course if a driver cant be traced its a different issue, however your post said .if a driver cant be identified at the time of the accident" implying that if you personally dont identify them you could be in trouble, (perhaps i took that up wrong) car reg should be sufficient to trace the driver, and indeed his/her insurance company

InsideInsurance

glentoran99 wrote: »

Of course if a driver cant be traced its a different issue, however your post said .if a driver cant be identified at the time of the accident" implying that if you personally dont identify them you could be in trouble, (perhaps i took that up wrong) car reg should be sufficient to trace the driver, and indeed his/her insurance company

Agree my wording wasnt perfect, though if you cannot identify them you COULD be in trouble as the police are not always that thorough.

I've had hundreds of cases where the TP denied being in the area at the time and so you have to wonder if there are really that many fake plates out there/ people writing down reg plates/ telephone numbers etc incorrectly.

Clearly the more information you get the lower the risks are

glentoran99

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Agree my wording wasnt perfect, though if you cannot identify them you COULD be in trouble as the police are not always that thorough.

I've had hundreds of cases where the TP denied being in the area at the time and so you have to wonder if there are really that many fake plates out there/ people writing down reg plates/ telephone numbers etc incorrectly.

Clearly the more information you get the lower the risks are

smartphones are a god send, clear photos of reg etc and even record where the photo was taken