Who pays?

outofmoney

Ok, to clear things up.
The Police car was chasing a car (Car A), we don't know why. Our son was driving up a narrow road and a car (Car came towards him so he pulled into a space to let them pass. As Car B was passing my son, car A came around the corner and face to face with Car B. So they had a car in front and the Police behind them. The started honking their horn so Car B began to reverse. Car A got impatient and just drove between Car B and our son causing damage to both vehicles. The Police then came through (They didn't hit either car) and continued the chase.
The Police lost the car and only got the first part of the number plate.

Aretnap

loskie wrote: »

get details from the Police of the car that hit his, IF it was insured then his insurance will claim off that of the offending vehicle even if it was stolen and not being driven by a legitimate user.

Only if the driver of the car (thief or otherwise) can be identified. Which given that he scarpered and was not caught, seems unlikely.

With neither the car nor the driver positively identified, realistically the son's only options are to make a claim on his own policy, or to not claim at all and grin and bear it (if the excess and increase in premium mean that a claim is not worthwhile financially).

Arklight

Shaun_of_the_Dead wrote: »

Only if the costs are recovered or else it will be an at fault claim.

I didn't realise that all claims that pay out are regarded as fault claims, even if they weren't your fault. Presumably there's be some record that he wasn't at fault so the premium hike wouldn't be as bad?

AdrianC

Arklight wrote: »

I didn't realise that all claims that pay out are regarded as fault claims, even if they weren't your fault. Presumably there's be some record that he wasn't at fault so the premium hike wouldn't be as bad?

Ultimately, it's who ended up paying.

If your insurer's hand ends up in their pocket as a result of having your business, it's your fault as far as they're concerned. If the other party pays in full, it's not your fault.

Car_54

Arklight wrote: »

Presumably there's be some record that he wasn't at fault so the premium hike wouldn't be as bad?

No, the records show it's a fault claim.