Hit uninsured car

System

Lomast wrote: »

I agree its not relevant but as an accident has occurred both parties are legally obliged to exchange details not just the guilty party

Only name and address.

As for the offering to do it outside of insurance, when I've been hit in the past and its been a low speed accident with very little damage that a couple of hundred quid at the most would put right I've offered that to the person who hit me. Why? Because in the event of a claim BOTH of our insurances will be going up the following year even though I wasn't at fault. People forget that even though you're the innocent party that your insurance will also go up the following year even though it is a "not at fault, all costs recovered" accident.

shaun_from_Africa

GothicStirling wrote: »

I most definitely not be giving him cash, for all you know it's a crash-for-cash scam. If it was genuine, he was driving illegally and shouldn't have been on the road. Probably why he wants cash, as as insurer will refuse to payout as he was breaking the law at the time of the accident.

Irrespective of someone driving illegally, I don't think that an insurer can legally refuse to pay a third party for damaged caused by someone covered by that insurer.

Warwick_Hunt

GothicStirling wrote: »

I most definitely not be giving him cash, for all you know it's a crash-for-cash scam. If it was genuine, he was driving illegally and shouldn't have been on the road. Probably why he wants cash, as as insurer will refuse to payout as he was breaking the law at the time of the accident.

I bet they don't and if it is a crash for cash just wait for the injury claim.

Car_54

GothicStirling wrote: »

I most definitely not be giving him cash, for all you know it's a crash-for-cash scam. If it was genuine, he was driving illegally and shouldn't have been on the road. Probably why he wants cash, as as insurer will refuse to payout as he was breaking the law at the time of the accident.

As others have already pointed out:

1. We don't know that he was driving illegally. The OP assumes he was, because he refused to give insurance information, as he was perfectly entitled to do.

2. Even if he was, he has the right to claim damages and the insurer can't refuse to pay out.

DUTR

Tarambor wrote: »

Only name and address.

As for the offering to do it outside of insurance, when I've been hit in the past and its been a low speed accident with very little damage that a couple of hundred quid at the most would put right I've offered that to the person who hit me. Why? Because in the event of a claim BOTH of our insurances will be going up the following year even though I wasn't at fault. People forget that even though you're the innocent party that your insurance will also go up the following year even though it is a "not at fault, all costs recovered" accident.

I have found that my premiums went down!
One time a guy ran into the side of my car (he was texting at the time) fortunately I took photo's ) he wanted to pay for the damage and I offered him to accompany me to the repair shop which was only a few miles away, anyways the repair was much greater than the couple of hundred quid he hoped, he then became elusive to calls from the insurance , so I went to the police (I too had to provide my documents) anyways 2 weeks later a letter arrived from Admirial informing they will honour the claim strange thing was the guy who crashed into my car his name had changed from the one he had given me. :eek:

GothicStirling

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

I bet they don't and if it is a crash for cash just wait for the injury claim.

I'd like to see them find a no-win-no-fee solicitor willing to take their case on.

y3andy

Car_54 wrote: »

First, we don't know that he wasn't insured.

Second, that sounds suspiciously like blackmail, which is a much more serious crime than driving without insurance.

No, it sounds exactly like blackmail. Two wrongs make a right don't they?

arcon5

DUTR wrote: »

I agree with this and other similar comments above.... however the OP's relative's insurer may have reason to believe their client is not fully liable.
Especially if they suspect a fraudulent claim from a 3rd party.
He should report the incident to authorities and his insurer.

That's nothing to do whether he's insured or not though. There's no suggestion of fraud here so him being uninsured doesn't change liability

Warwick_Hunt

GothicStirling wrote: »

I'd like to see them find a no-win-no-fee solicitor willing to take their case on.

Why not? Your liability is clear. Who drove into the back of a stationary vehicle!?

pinkshoes

Definitely NO cash.

Involve the police and I would also notify the driver that he must also contact your insurance to claim and that the insurance will be notifying the police when he claims unless he can provide valid insurance details.

If this driver has no insurance then I hope his car gets crushed.