Drunk Driving Crash - who will pay out?

gardner1

henrygregory wrote: »

Good morning, just looking for a little advice for a friend (yes it really is, I don’t drink or drink drive - am not stupid).

He had one too many and drove up the road from pub to his house and hit a parked car causing quite significant damage to his vehicle and lots of scraping of back bumper and wing of parked car.
Luckily, police were already patrolling and came across him in seconds, breathalysed him and I think he said he was double the limit – can’t remember exactly.

He knows he is going to loose his licence for 12 mths – what a silly mistake and a jolly good job no people were around or injured.

My question is what will be the stance with the insurance here. My understanding was (and something I tell many drinking friends) if you’re drunk behind the wheel, your policy would be invalid from inception.
Meaning any damage to your vehicle, would need to be covered by yourself and any damage to the claimant’s vehicle, would still legally be the responsibility of your insurer, though one would expect the insurer would then pursue you for the money they have had to spend on the claimant.

Am I clear on that? He is naturally worried, and tells me that the arresting officer thought he had caused around £8k in damage, so a considerable amount.

I have told him it is best he doesn’t look into matters too much as he may find it all quite stressful, but to be honest, and deal with the matter and put it behind him. So silly that people do this, he needed a vehicle for his job, just not worth it over a silly tipple.

Any clarification on my understanding would be greatly appreciated.

Well it's a case of tough 5h1t for your friend because his one for the road is going to cost him big time
Insurance company will be chasing him for money
His car might be a write off which he will be financially responsible for
He might lose his job
His insurance will be sky high after his ban ends

Silvertabby

Well it's a case of tough 5h1t for your friend because his one for the road is going to cost him big time
Insurance company will be chasing him for money
His car might be a write off which he will be financially responsible for
He might lose his job
His insurance will be sky high after his ban ends
Posted by gardner1

Your friend should be counting his blessings. He could have killed someone.

henrygregory

Thank you everyone for your comments, especially the detailed ones.

Yes, for those of you saying he should be counting his blessings etc, certainly, and I think he has realised this. It is just a shame that people can't experience this before they drink and drive, as I think they would really re-consider what they are doing.

Thankfully no one was hurt in the accident. Let's just hope more people can get the idea into their heads that this sort of thing is in no way acceptable, even if it is just to move your car off of double yellows. It isn't worth it.

henrygregory

Aretnap wrote: »

It doesn't matter what they say in the policy - they will still have to pay for the third party's repairs. The Road Traffic Act states that any term in a policy which attempts to invalidate the third party cover in these circumstances has no effect. (Drunkenness is covered by "the physical or mental condition of the person driving the vehicle")

It does, however, give the insurer the right to recover any sums it pays to the third party from you, so it would be of small comfort to you. It's there to protect the third party rather than to protect you. Essentially it means that if you are unable to pay for all the damage yourself then it's your insurer who loses out rather than the innocent third party.

Thanks, that is very interesting. I had assumed they would use the MIB.

lara.mango19

Hi all

Any update as to the outcome of this as am in similar situation?

Thanks

Quentin

Try a pm to the OP (who hasn't logged in here since January)

henrygregory

Hello there, 
I have just seen there had been a few more posts since my last one.
I can't imagine this will go down too well....
He went to court, lost his licence for 12 months and had to go on a driver improvement course.
Maybe he was saying this to make good out of a bad situation but he said he got bonus points for showing up to court, more bonus points for actually admitting he was at fault and additional bonus points for agreeing to take an improvement course. He was also fined but not sure exactly what that came to but effectively the more bonus/plus points, the less harsh the punishment.
He wrote his own car off during the incident (it was worth about 1k) so did not put in a claim and amazingly, he managed to get off completely with the insurance. It obviously paid out to the third party but their call handlers didn't ask him if he had been drink driving, so he didn't tell them. He just answered the questions they asked and they never came after him.

I can imagine this will rile quite a few of you. I know him so slightly different however, I find it absolutely unbelievable that someone can get away in that respect. I don't drink but I can guarantee you if I did and was this stupid, I would have had the book thrown at me like the majority of us would. 
Our local rag always publishes news articles on local people who are booked drinking and driving or shoplifting, he also managed to miss out on being featured in the paper. One lucky guy in many respects. 

Hopefully he has learned his lesson. I feel sorry for the poor buggers who's parked cars were smashed because of him and other general victims of drink drivers as it isn't a laughing matter, not something to be proud of that you got bonus points so got away with things by way of more lenient punishments. People end up seriously injured or dead because of actions like this. 

He found it very amusing a couple of months back that my 685 per annum motor insurance was hilarious as apparently since he did his improvement course, and re-applied for his licence, his premium has gone down - I don't believe this. I also happen to own a brand new BWM not a clapped out 12 year old car like him so obviously, the fee I pay will be higher as burglars like using cars like mine for quick getaways. I can imagine he must pretty some of his experience up to make it sound not as bad as it was, but the reality is/was he did not end up getting chased by his insurer to cover the cost of his silly mistake which I find quite surprising. 
Sorry for the long post but thought I would fill you all in. 

Aretnap

henrygregory said:

I can imagine this will rile quite a few of you. I know him so slightly different however, I find it absolutely unbelievable that someone can get away in that respect. I don't drink but I can guarantee you if I did and was this stupid, I would have had the book thrown at me like the majority of us would.

Thanks for the update.

To be honest, the penalty doesn't sounds unusually lenient. You don't say exactly what his alcohol reading was (and you may well not know - I wouldn't take what he says as gospel), but if it was up to 59uL (almost twice the limit) the magistrates guidelines are for a ban of 12-16 months and an income-based fine. It sounds like what he got was within this range. Pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity will generally reduce the fine by up to a third, but have no effect on the ban. Completing a drink-driver rehabilitation course on the other hand will have reduced the ban by 25%.

If his alcohol level was 60 or higher than he would have been in the next band for sentencing and arguably he got off lightly - however if 12 months is the length of the ban after the reduction for taking the course, it's not wildly outside of the expected range (17-22 months).

henrygregory said:

He wrote his own car off during the incident (it was worth about 1k) so did not put in a claim and amazingly, he managed to get off completely with the insurance. It obviously paid out to the third party but their call handlers didn't ask him if he had been drink driving, so he didn't tell them. He just answered the questions they asked and they never came after him.

If they didn't come after him, it's likely because he had one of the many insurers whose terms don't have a drink driving exclusion, so he would have been covered for this accident the same as any other accident. Obviously he chose his insurer wisely.