Naming of Insured Driver in accident

StripeyUk

a.turner wrote: »

So you only have cover for cars you own and are driving at the time?
Sounds like third party fire and theft.
So what insurance was covering the vehicle at the time? Given you want it to be a public place and have involved the police.

Thanks once again, but this thread is not about my insurance or cover, it is SPECIFICALLY about:
a. tracing a driver
b. where the insurance company are hiding behind new case law of "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" to avoid dealing with a claim

I am really surprised at the interest in irrelevant elements, please only reply if you can shed some light on the question posted, while I am a new user here, and have said so, I feel taken aback by the replies ... not a forum where you make new users feel welcome!

System

StripeyUk wrote: »

Thanks once again, but this thread is not about my insurance or cover, it is SPECIFICALLY about:
a. tracing a driver
b. where the insurance company are hiding behind new case law of "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" to avoid dealing with a claim

I am really surprised at the interest in irrelevant elements, please only reply if you can shed some light on the question posted, while I am a new user here, and have said so, I feel taken aback by the replies ... not a forum where you make new users feel welcome!

and there in lies your problem, people that comment on the forum are not solicitors but you are trying to get legal advice. This is why you are being told to contact your insurance company, they have the expertise to deal with this sort of thing, alternatively contact a local solicitor that deals with motor insurance claims. Your situation is too complex for a forum of amateurs just trying to help.

StripeyUk

Simonr66 wrote: »

and there in lies your problem, people that comment on the forum are not solicitors but you are trying to get legal advice. This is why you are being told to contact your insurance company, they have the expertise to deal with this sort of thing, alternatively contact a local solicitor that deals with motor insurance claims. Your situation is too complex for a forum of amateurs just trying to help.

Hi Simonr66
Thanks for your reply. I was hopeful that this sort of "tracing" would not be so complex or unusual and that a simple remedy would exist ... or pointers to the correct legal framework or case law might be forthcoming ... still hopeful if anyone can help :-)

a.turner

StripeyUk wrote: »

Thanks once again, but this thread is not about my insurance or cover, it is SPECIFICALLY about:
a. tracing a driver
b. where the insurance company are hiding behind new case law of "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" to avoid dealing with a claim

I am really surprised at the interest in irrelevant elements, please only reply if you can shed some light on the question posted, while I am a new user here, and have said so, I feel taken aback by the replies ... not a forum where you make new users feel welcome!

Cameron v LV is basically saying unless you can ID the driver there is no automatic right to claim from the insurance. So you either claim on your own policy of via the MIB.

Even if you do identify the woman given the history so far it'll take a court to resolve this.

societys_child

DROVE INTO MY PROPERTY.

If the car park is regarded as a public place, and the car is your property, it should have had insurance, you say it didn't because you wern't driving it. Something doesn't add up . .

Car_54

StripeyUk wrote: »

I have an insurance policy that covers cars I am driving, I was not driving it. It's not fraud and I have no need to disclose to my insurers. The vehicle is not listed on the insurance policy, was parked on private property albeit with public access.

I believe the policy I have will not cover the damage, as I was not in the vehicle. The circumstances would be the same if I had a TPFT policy.

If I've understood right - if you're driving the car, it's covered. If you park it and get out, it's not. So you've then parked an uninsured car on a public road. That sounds unlike any insurance policy I've heard of.

Joe_Horner

Car_54 wrote: »

And if you eventually succeed against the TP's insurer, your own insurer will find out anyway.

The OP's insurer will find out regardless of success because the third party insurer will almost certainly share the fact of the claim being submitted.

Scrapit

StripeyUk wrote: »

I have an insurance policy that covers cars I am driving, I was not driving it. It's not fraud and I have no need to disclose to my insurers. The vehicle is not listed on the insurance policy, was parked on private property albeit with public access.

I believe the policy I have will not cover the damage, as I was not in the vehicle. The circumstances would be the same if I had a TPFT policy.

However, the thread is not about why or if I report to my insurance company etc, or moral judgement when only part of the facts are in evidence.

Respectfully, the question being posed is about the ability to trace and if needed gain disclosure about the tortfeasor who damaged my property (regardless of being a vehicle, but in this case it was).

While I appreciate the time some have taken to reply, I'm only asking for specific information about how to identify the person who DROVE INTO MY PROPERTY. Your views on my use of time or otherwise are not constructive to the question asked.

I hope that helps clarify things, but the I feel replies are going off topic, and I'd rather try to keep it to the specific and narrow area of interest. I hope you understand!
:huh::huh::huh:

Are you sure that's correct? How can you ever park at the roadside if that is the case? I've never heard of that. Also would you not need to sorn a vehicle as soon as you get out of it? And tax etc? This, wether you like it or not, will prompt more questions.

StripeyUk

I am uttelyr surprised and disappointed by the lack of respect shown and line of irrelevant questions despite polite requests to stay on topic! I thought this forum was populated by educated people, I’m questioning my assumption at this point …
This is NOT about my insurance, any moral questions or fraud, my insurance effectively equates to Third Party & Fire, they will not pursue a claim on my behalf. The vehicle was parked off street, that is not on a "Public Road" but within a car park, a public space, but not a Public Highway.Yes, private land can be considered a public place/space.

This question relates to only TWO VERY specific narrow areas:
a. tracing a driver who fails to stop/report
b. insurance company hiding behind new case law of "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" to avoid dealing with a claim

I have asked for replies only about these specific aspects, If you cannot answer on those points or respect that, try posting on another thread, as your views/comments might be more relevant there ,,, here they will be ignored, in the nicest possible way, silence.

a.turner

StripeyUk wrote: »

I am uttelyr surprised and disappointed by the lack of respect shown and line of irrelevant questions despite polite requests to stay on topic! I thought this forum was populated by educated people, I’m questioning my assumption at this point …
This is NOT about my insurance, any moral questions or fraud, my insurance effectively equates to Third Party & Fire, they will not pursue a claim on my behalf. The vehicle was parked off street, that is not on a "Public Road" but within a car park, a public space, but not a Public Highway.Yes, private land can be considered a public place/space.

This question relates to only TWO VERY specific narrow areas:
a. tracing a driver who fails to stop/report
b. insurance company hiding behind new case law of "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" to avoid dealing with a claim

I have asked for replies only about these specific aspects, If you cannot answer on those points or respect that, try posting on another thread, as your views/comments might be more relevant there ,,, here they will be ignored, in the nicest possible way, silence.

You seem to want it all ways. Given the insurance aren't playing ball go to the MIB.