Bro knocked off motorbike, not his fault, BUT...

Stevie_Palimo

Guest101 wrote: »

The problem is you pay insurance at a minimum to cover other peoples losses, not your own.


Then optionally cover your own.

It is not a problem at all that I pay it, My problem is that people who believe they are above the law or just plain stupid still get to cash in on a system that I pay towards, You quite clearly understood this point as usual and seeing me post decided to pick fault at what I wrote.

Tothepoint.

Squirrel85 wrote: »

Hello.
I am hoping someone can advise me. My brother has been knocked off his motorbike and is on hospital with a broken femur and pelvis. The other driver has admitted it was his fault and my brother did nothing to cause the accident...However, and it is a big one, my brothers bike was not taxed or insured and he was over the limit (we do not condone his lifestyle - he has always been wayward). Obviously he has been arrested for those two offences.

My question is will he get any payout from the man's insurance company based on this? He will be unable to work for minimum 3 months and who knows the physical ramifications in future. And technically despite his idiocy no one is disputing that it was the other man's fault entirely. Can anyone advise please? Thank you

So he has a broken pelvis and he's been arrested?

Have they bailed him or dearrested him?

How do you know he was over the drink drive limit? If he's not been to a Police Station yet they'll have no evidential specimen. He's only at best taken a roadside test all be it maybe in hospital. But then I guess he's been there a while if the result of the blood test is already known.

Robisere

Leaving aside the question of an insurance payout for the moment:
Your brother rode a motorcycle whilst drunk, untaxed and uninsured.

However serious the after effects of his injuries may be, he is alive. You say that he has made a long practice of drink-riding and never paying his vehicle dues. Had it not been for the motorist colliding with his bike, it is almost certain that one day he would have been the cause of an accident in which some other motorist or pedestrian would have been involved and injured or killed. It would have been very difficult for the victim(s) of such a hypothetical incident, to claim damages from your brother.

Alternatively, he could have done other sober, legally-documented road users a favour, and wrapped his bike around a wall, without damage to anyone else.

It is my earnest hope that he recovers full mobility from this incident. Then is prosecuted for riding whilst intoxicated and given a huge fine and a stiff jail sentence. I have friends who were badly injured by a drunken driver. Many other people are killed and injured every year by drunks at the wheel or the handlebars. I have no sympathy for your brother and I hope he is taught a big lesson.

Tothepoint.

Robisere wrote: »

Leaving aside the question of an insurance payout for the moment:
Your brother rode a motorcycle whilst drunk, untaxed and uninsured.

However serious the after effects of his injuries may be, he is alive. You say that he has made a long practice of drink-riding and never paying his vehicle dues. Had it not been for the motorist colliding with his bike, it is almost certain that one day he would have been the cause of an accident in which some other motorist or pedestrian would have been involved and injured or killed. It would have been very difficult for the victim(s) of such a hypothetical incident, to claim damages from your brother.

Alternatively, he could have done other sober, legally-documented road users a favour, and wrapped his bike around a wall, without damage to anyone else.

It is my earnest hope that he recovers full mobility from this incident. Then is prosecuted for riding whilst intoxicated and given a huge fine and a stiff jail sentence. I have friends who were badly injured by a drunken driver. Many other people are killed and injured every year by drunks at the wheel or the handlebars. I have no sympathy for your brother and I hope he is taught a big lesson.

It would be easier to claim from an uninsured motorcyclist than a car driver and he is unlikely to make off with a broken pelvis. The police would attend establish his name, the fact there is no insurance and the MIB would pay out.

Stevie_Palimo

Tothepoint. wrote: »

It would be easier to claim from an uninsured motorcyclist than a car driver and he is unlikely to make off with a broken pelvis. The police would attend establish his name, the fact there is no insurance and the MIB would pay out.

There is no reason to justify and or exclude certain members of society from paying there dues as do most genuine, honest hard working people.

We should not have a need to claim through the MIB as there should be systems in place to prevent insurance and tax evaders from entering our roads.

Head_The_Ball

Squirrel85 wrote: »

.. The other driver has admitted it was his fault and my brother did nothing to cause the accident......

The other driver may well change his story and blame your brother.

Are there any independent witnesses or is it one person's word against another?

The accident may well not have been his fault but perhaps if he hadn't been drunk he could have avoided it.

As your brother was drunk at the time this could all end very badly for him.

And frankly, I hope it does.

I despise drunk riders/drivers. I despise those who don't insure their vehicles. They are a menace to the majority of us who do insure our vehicles and don't drive drunk.

iammumtoone

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

My problem is that people who believe they are above the law or just plain stupid still get to cash in on a system that I pay towards.

^^ I pay my car insurance I sometimes wonder why I bother. If I stop paying it, it seems if someone hits me no problem I can still claim fully against them. If I hit someone, well they can try to sue me they might win but they can't get what I don't have so I won't lose anything. I am paying out 100s each year that I don't need to.

But that aside the law is the law then if the OPs brother wasn't insured then he has every right to claim off the other parties insurance.

The law needs changing so an uninsured/no MOT driver can't claim against anyone. Maybe more people would have insurance if that was the case.

missile

He has my sympathies.

I hope he makes a full recovery.

iammumtoone

I think the problem your bother has is not the fact hes was uninsured and no MOT he can still claim with this, its the fact he was over the limit.

The other driver will have thought it was his fault as he would have assumed your bother was fully concentrating and in control of his bike. Once the fact he was drunk comes out it means that it will be known his judgement was impaired so he may have been able to avoid the accident. There is no proof either way how a sober person would have reacted in that situation and if the accident would still have occurred/been so serious. I suppose this depends on how much over the limit he was, just over a judge might rule in his favour, well over and its is looking more unlikely.

Hopefully this will be a lesson to your brother and he will now change his ways, in some sense if that happens no amount of money/compensation would have been able to buy that.

Tothepoint.

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

There is no reason to justify and or exclude certain members of society from paying there dues as do most genuine, honest hard working people.

We should not have a need to claim through the MIB as there should be systems in place to prevent insurance and tax evaders from entering our roads.

The technology exists but no one will put their name to authorising the use of such systems.