Sold my car and now been told it's caused an accident. Help!

rs65

Astronaughtwannabe wrote: »

I can't see how you'd have an insurable interest in the car.

Have you read posts 15 and 16?

Eeasp

dacouch - thank you, I was trying to find further info on the bike guy but nothing past November that was new.

Currently on hold trying to a copy of our policy, it's in the loft at the moment in a file and I cant get up there without the ladder that's been borrowed!

It's just a waiting game now I guess.

rs65

Eeasp wrote: »

Currently on hold trying to a copy of our policy

Is it available online?

dacouch

Eeasp wrote: »

dacouch - thank you, I was trying to find further info on the bike guy but nothing past November that was new.

Currently on hold trying to a copy of our policy, it's in the loft at the moment in a file and I cant get up there without the ladder that's been borrowed!

It's just a waiting game now I guess.

Most Insurers have downloadable copies of their policy booklet on their websites. If your policy contains such a statement it's most likely to be near the end of the policy in the exclusions / general conditions part.

There is another long shot that may work but is very difficult to prove in your situation. If the new owner of your vehicle was using the vehicle for a use that was not covered by your policy then your insurer and thus you are not liable. For instance if your policy only covered Social, Domestic & Pleasure and Commuting but he was using it in connection with his business then your off the hook.

However proving that at this stage and in your situation would be very difficult and is a long shot to start with.

Have you had any personal contact with the driver of the vehicle that the new owner hit? If so have they given you any information eg whether the new owner exchanged insurance details at the scene or whether the police were involved and if so what action they took.

Eeasp

dacouch - i tried to find an online version but didnt find one. I've not been put in contact with the other party, should I ask my insurance for their details? It was our insurance company who got in contact with us not the other party in the incident.

dacouch

Who are you insured by?

Eeasp

Admiral. And now having searched around it appears that they are not very well liked for all sort of reasons....uh-oh.

dacouch

Eeasp wrote: »

Admiral. And now having searched around it appears that they are not very well liked for all sort of reasons....uh-oh.

The Ryan Air of Insurance...

You can obtain a policy wording if you log into your existing account with Admiral or if you run a quote through.

If you run a quote through it gives you the current policy wording which may not have applied when you took out cover as they update their policy wordings fairly frequently

Astronaughtwannabe

rs65 wrote: »

Have you read posts 15 and 16?

Nope but have now.


And the point I missed was?

dacouch

Here's one of their Policy Wordings, it's probably not upto date and I cannot see in it a statement confirming cover ceases upon sale / transfer.

http://www.admiral.com/policyDocs/AD116%20_policybook_1013.pdf

I may have missed it though.

It's worth checking your own version though.

I did notice this though...

This is the wording Insurers rely on to seek recovery of payments they're obliged to make due to the Road Traffic Act requiring them to.

"Payments made under compulsory insurance regulations and right of recovery

If the Law in any country in which your policy operates requires us to settle a claim on
your behalf, which, if this Law had not existed, we would not be obliged to pay, we shall
be entitled to recover such payments either from you or the driver."

http://www.admiral.com/policyDocs/AD116%20_policybook_1013.pdf (Page 24)

It's another long shot but if the new owner of the vehicle is not identified eg he did a runner and / or the person he crashed with or the police etc do not have his details as the actual driver of the vehicle. Then generally your Insurer would not be liable to pay out the claim under the Road Traffic Act which is a LAW.

If this was the case they would be obliged to pay the claim out by the MIB as an Article 75 Insurer under the rules of association (Membership) of the MIB.

It's a long shot and I may be wrong but my interpretation would be if they have to pay out under the RTA under section 151 this would mean they're making a payment because they're required to by law (Note this against the section I highlighted above from Admiral.

If the driver is not identified and they're not obliged to pay out by the RTA but by the MIB as an Article 75 Insurer. My interpretation is this may mean they're not paying out due to a law but by a regulation placed on them by the MIB.

It's a long shot but worth keeping a note of in case it does end up going down that route. You may be able to argue that the policy states they will only recover monies they pay out due to a LAW, the regulation by the MIB may not be a law but a contractural obligation between them and the MIB.

This would be something to take legal advice on if it got to that stage.