Hit and run, third party who's trader claiming vehicle was sold?

Clowpow

Hi guys, I have been involved in an incident with another car who pulled out on me on a side road and I just want some advice from anyone who knows more about situations like what i'm going through at the moment as it feels like i'm going to explode as it doesn't look good currently!

I managed to get a picture of their vehicle registration and the damage to their vehicle before they drove off, police was informed, took a statement was given a reference number.

However the company I am instructing to deal with the claim have stated that the third party's insurers where the vehicle was insured with has stated that their client sold the vehicle prior to the incident and if this is the case - I may have to go through the MID.

I've established the following:

On the night of the incident, the vehicle was insured on the MID, the police on the night said it was insured, my insurers said it was insured.

A day or two after the incident, the vehicle was showing as no longer insured.

When I was contacted by my solicitors, I was told that the third party's insurers that their client had not reported any incident in relation to my vehicle.

This just stinks of trying to pull a fast one where the owner is trying wash his hands of the claim.

My solicitors have asked the third party insurance for an invoice to show vehicle was sold prior to the incident but i'm not optimistic, I mean it's not exactly difficult to write up an invoice showing a sale has taken place, they said they'll investigate any potential invoice that is put forward by the third party but I think I know how this will turn out.

They said because I don't know the name of the driver too this isn't great which I don't understand what difference does it make anyway!

What I don't understand, is the vehicle was shown as insured at the time, regardless if there was a sale at the time which I very much doubt - I've been told trade policy insurance is a bit different to standard motor insurance polices where it will be difficult to claim if the vehicle was sold, but the car was showing as insured so the third party's insurance should pay out and recoup their losses through the policy holder for their negligence of not cancelling their policy prior to the crash, it's just not right!!

Billy_Bullocks

Clowpow wrote: »

Hi guys, I have been involved in an incident with another car who pulled out on me on a side road and I just want some advice from anyone who knows more about situations like what i'm going through at the moment as it feels like i'm going to explode as it doesn't look good currently!

I managed to get a picture of their vehicle registration and the damage to their vehicle before they drove off, police was informed, took a statement was given a reference number.

However the company I am instructing to deal with the claim have stated that the third party's insurers where the vehicle was insured with has stated that their client sold the vehicle prior to the incident and if this is the case - I may have to go through the MID.

I've established the following:

On the night of the incident, the vehicle was insured on the MID, the police on the night said it was insured, my insurers said it was insured.

A day or two after the incident, the vehicle was showing as no longer insured.

When I was contacted by my solicitors, I was told that the third party's insurers that their client had not reported any incident in relation to my vehicle.

This just stinks of trying to pull a fast one where the owner is trying wash his hands of the claim.

My solicitors have asked the third party insurance for an invoice to show vehicle was sold prior to the incident but i'm not optimistic, I mean it's not exactly difficult to write up an invoice showing a sale has taken place, they said they'll investigate any potential invoice that is put forward by the third party but I think I know how this will turn out.

They said because I don't know the name of the driver too this isn't great which I don't understand what difference does it make anyway!

What I don't understand, is the vehicle was shown as insured at the time, regardless if there was a sale at the time which I very much doubt - I've been told trade policy insurance is a bit different to standard motor insurance polices where it will be difficult to claim if the vehicle was sold, but the car was showing as insured so the third party's insurance should pay out and recoup their losses through the policy holder for their negligence of not cancelling their policy prior to the crash, it's just not right!!

Have you got comprehensive insurance?

If you have the MIB won't entertain you.

DoaM

Do you have fully comp insurance? If yes, why are you handling it rather then letting your insurer handle it all? (If they can't reclaim costs from the 3rd party then it'll appear as an At Fault claim on your insurance record ... as far as I know, the increased premium difference between a Fault and Non-Fault claim is not significant ... your premiums will go up anyway).

Clowpow

Thanks for your responses, yes, I have fully comprehensive insurance, well if I can't claim via the MIB then it's strange that one of the claim handlers (part of my insurance group) has stated I may have to go through this route to recover any losses.

Worse case scenario I will obviously go through my insurer to recoup my losses as the repair bill will be in the thousands but i'm not happy about doing so, the third party vehicle was insured at the time of the incident and if there was no call made or email sent to cancel the damn policy that the third party insurers should pay out for my damages. It's just not right if this will be the case.

Aretnap

Clowpow wrote: »

They said because I don't know the name of the driver too this isn't great which I don't understand what difference does it make anyway!

It matters because there are several different schemes to compensate victims of uninsured/untraced drivers, which entitle you to different things depending on which one you can claim on.

If there was an insurance policy of any sort running on the car, and the driver was identified, then the Road Traffic Act requires the car's insurer to pay for damage caused to third partys, whether or not the person driving the car was covered by the policy. So if the trader had sold the car and not cancelled the policy, or even if the car was stolen, you'd be able to claim off the trader's policy - if you knew who the driver was.

However the above does NOT apply if the identity of the driver is unknown - because strictly speaking the insurer doesn't have to pay until you get a court judgement against the driver, and you can't file a court case against an anonymous shadow who disappeared into the night.

So if you can't find the driver then you have to make a claim against the Motor Insurer's Bureau instead under the untraced driver's agreement. The MIB scheme is more restrictive - they're an insurer of last resort and will only pay for losses if no other insurance policy, including your own, covers them. (Their primary purpose is to ensure that hit and run victims aren't left penniless if they're seriously injured and unable to work - not to ensure that they keep their no claims bonuses). So if you have comprehensive cover, and you can't find the driver, you'll likely have to make a claim on your own insurance policy

DoaM

If your insurers are already handling this, just let them get on with it.

Tilt

Are the police investigating the fail to stop issue or is the car stolen? If not the latter surely the police will be able to trace the driver/'new owner'?

Retrogamer

If the police follow up on this properly they can request the registered keeper at the time of the accident to tell them who was driving (or most likely to be driving in this case)
They will provide the new owners details if it has indeed sold, then the police continue along this path until they find the driver, or if someone "forgets" they may end up with 6 points and a fine instead.

stator

If you just happen to visit the area of the business in question, might you spot the person who was driving?

Billy_Bullocks

Retrogamer wrote: »

If the police follow up on this properly they can request the registered keeper at the time of the accident to tell them who was driving (or most likely to be driving in this case)
They will provide the new owners details if it has indeed sold, then the police continue along this path until they find the driver, or if someone "forgets" they may end up with 6 points and a fine instead.

Or the come to the end of the line with just a name and address but no date of birth and it all gets filed.

dacouch

stator wrote: »

If you just happen to visit the area of the business in question, might you spot the person who was driving?

If the garage is stupid enough they may even have the vehicle on their forecourt or by the sounds of it they trade from home so outside their home.

If I was the OP and knew who the trader was I would be inclined to get a friend to show interest in one of their vehicles. While they're there ask the trader to recommend a garage to do some minor repairs on their own vehicle before they look to trade it in.

Traders almost always use the same vehicle repairers for all their work so you may find the damaged car at the repairers they recommend