Suing an uninsured driver

diystarter7

Hi OP

First and foremost, I wish you all the best if you decide to go down that route. I'm not sure if you can or you can't when the insurance co is involved but good luck.

As another poster said and I have always said this to people that are owned money/damages/etc - please consider the other person's fincial circumstances, EG do they have a penny to their name - and often one gets a false impression that they may own something but often its on HP and or registered in someone's name and rarely do these types  work

Again, good luck!

DullGreyGuy

baser999 said:

Alter_ego said:

It's rarely worth suing someone who has no money

And yet he drives a car - unless of course it was stolen. 

Something wrong with a system that allows the other driver to get off scot-free

Was the vehicle uninsured or just the driver?

If the vehicle was uninsured then the DVLA will be pursuing them under the continuous insurance regs with the associated fines etc unless they've SORN the vehicle in which case when it triggers various ANPRs then they'll be chasing for breaching the SORN and continuous insurance regs

If the vehicle was insured and just the driver wasnt then why arent they pursuing the RTA insurer of the vehicle?

In reality its those with insurance that get off because its their insurers that cough up.

Robbo66

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

well thats changed as you could previously

MarvinDay

DullGreyGuy said:

Ebe_Scrooge said:

cheeky51 said:

if my insurance company are not successful would I then be able to take the driver to small claims court myself?

Of course you can.  But what makes you think you would be any more successful than an insurance company with a whole legal department full of experts in the subject?

Yes, it's annoying, to say the least, but unfortunately it's just "one of those things"

No you cannot, the insurance company sues in the name of their insured. You cannot sue the same person twice for the same thing. You have to lodge an appeal if you dont like the outcome of the first case not a second suing. 

The reality is it depends what you mean by "its not successful"... if they decide they have no assets and so issue proceedings then you could however you have to include your insurance company's outlay in the claim not just your excess. Keep your insurers informed though, they are likely to want an indemnity agreement from you if you are acting against their advices. 

Similarly if they win but then decide the persons no assets then you could pay for enforcement but again you are pursuing the whole debt and probably signing an indemnity 

That always used to be the case in criminal court (but even that changed a few years ago) but it's never been the case when taking civil action.
Double jeopardy means that in some instances, you can't be tried for the same criminal offence more than once but if the OP was to take the driver to court, this wouldn't be a criminal trial as they would be attempting a civil action to recover their personal losses.

Ectophile

If your insurance company has paid for the repairs, then you can't sue for that loss because you haven't lost anything.

However, you could sue for your policy excess, that you had to pay out for.

If you wanted to, you could pay the court fee to initiate the legal action, then leave the CCJ sitting on file if the driver doesn't pay it.  An unpaid CCJ will trash their credit score for years to come.

Aretnap

MarvinDay said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Ebe_Scrooge said:

cheeky51 said:

if my insurance company are not successful would I then be able to take the driver to small claims court myself?

Of course you can.  But what makes you think you would be any more successful than an insurance company with a whole legal department full of experts in the subject?

Yes, it's annoying, to say the least, but unfortunately it's just "one of those things"

No you cannot, the insurance company sues in the name of their insured. You cannot sue the same person twice for the same thing. You have to lodge an appeal if you dont like the outcome of the first case not a second suing. 

The reality is it depends what you mean by "its not successful"... if they decide they have no assets and so issue proceedings then you could however you have to include your insurance company's outlay in the claim not just your excess. Keep your insurers informed though, they are likely to want an indemnity agreement from you if you are acting against their advices. 

Similarly if they win but then decide the persons no assets then you could pay for enforcement but again you are pursuing the whole debt and probably signing an indemnity 

That always used to be the case in criminal court (but even that changed a few years ago) but it's never been the case when taking civil action.
Double jeopardy means that in some instances, you can't be tried for the same criminal offence more than once but if the OP was to take the driver to court, this wouldn't be a criminal trial as they would be attempting a civil action to recover their personal losses.

Double jeapordy may apply only to criminal cases, however much the same principle applies to civil cases under the name of Res Judicata. At its simplest level it's just the blindingly obvious principle that if you sue someone and don't get the result you want you can't just expect to sue then again and hope for a better result second time around - your claim will be struck out as having already been adjudicated upon. And if you did get the result you wanted first time round getting a second judgement would be pointless - you would have to enforce the judgement that you actually have.

DullGreyGuy

Robbo66 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

well thats changed as you could previously

Yes it did change in 2015 from memory... though I always used to mix up the uninsured and untraced driver agreements so double checked first

MarvinDay said:
That always used to be the case in criminal court (but even that changed a few years ago) but it's never been the case when taking civil action.

Double jeopardy means that in some instances, you can't be tried for the same criminal offence more than once but if the OP was to take the driver to court, this wouldn't be a criminal trial as they would be attempting a civil action to recover their personal losses.

Totally agree its civil law not criminal

I would be interested in knowing the legislation which says that if you dont like the outcome of a civil court case you have the option to reissue and sue the person again and hope for a different outcome rather than having to appeal the original case

MarvinDay

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

well thats changed as you could previously

Yes it did change in 2015 from memory... though I always used to mix up the uninsured and untraced driver agreements so double checked first

MarvinDay said:
That always used to be the case in criminal court (but even that changed a few years ago) but it's never been the case when taking civil action.

Double jeopardy means that in some instances, you can't be tried for the same criminal offence more than once but if the OP was to take the driver to court, this wouldn't be a criminal trial as they would be attempting a civil action to recover their personal losses.

Totally agree its civil law not criminal

I would be interested in knowing the legislation which says that if you dont like the outcome of a civil court case you have the option to reissue and sue the person again and hope for a different outcome rather than having to appeal the original case

I'm not implying that you could continually attempt to sue someone in the civil court.
What I was responding to was this comment:

No you cannot, the insurance company sues in the name of their insured. You cannot sue the same person twice for the same thing. 

and my point (obviously badly made) was that you although the driver would be getting sued more than once for the same incident, no one person would be attempting to sue the same person twice.
The insurers would be suing for their losses then the OP would be suing to recover their uninsured losses.

It's a bit like this case:
https://www.parklaneplowden.co.uk/being-tried-for-the-same-tort-twice-double-jeopardy-in-the-civil-courts/
Although the defendant had been sued and won their case, the judge allowed another claimant to also sue them despite the defendant having won the 1st case.

As with the OP and their insurers, that case involved two separate claimants claiming for two different amounts from a single incident.

DullGreyGuy

MarvinDay said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

DullGreyGuy said:

Robbo66 said:

Providing you have the details of the other drive and vehicle you could try and claim via the motor Insurance Bureau. I am not 100% sure of the process but worth giving them a call as part of you annual premium is paid to them for just such scenarios

You cannot claim from the MIB if you have your own insurance... OP has advised he has comp insurance on their vehicle (by virtue of the excess)

well thats changed as you could previously

Yes it did change in 2015 from memory... though I always used to mix up the uninsured and untraced driver agreements so double checked first

MarvinDay said:
That always used to be the case in criminal court (but even that changed a few years ago) but it's never been the case when taking civil action.

Double jeopardy means that in some instances, you can't be tried for the same criminal offence more than once but if the OP was to take the driver to court, this wouldn't be a criminal trial as they would be attempting a civil action to recover their personal losses.

Totally agree its civil law not criminal

I would be interested in knowing the legislation which says that if you dont like the outcome of a civil court case you have the option to reissue and sue the person again and hope for a different outcome rather than having to appeal the original case

I'm not implying that you could continually attempt to sue someone in the civil court.
What I was responding to was this comment:

No you cannot, the insurance company sues in the name of their insured. You cannot sue the same person twice for the same thing. 

and my point (obviously badly made) was that you although the driver would be getting sued more than once for the same incident, no one person would be attempting to sue the same person twice.
The insurers would be suing for their losses then the OP would be suing to recover their uninsured losses.

It's a bit like this case:
https://www.parklaneplowden.co.uk/being-tried-for-the-same-tort-twice-double-jeopardy-in-the-civil-courts/
Although the defendant had been sued and won their case, the judge allowed another claimant to also sue them despite the defendant having won the 1st case.

As with the OP and their insurers, that case involved two separate claimants claiming for two different amounts from a single incident.

But your insurer sues in your name... the law subjugates the rights otherwise they would be too remote.

If you are in a non-fault accident your employer has to pay you sick pay but they cannot sue the driver to recover the sick pay because they are too remote.

Look at a credit hire agreement these days and you will see some very convoluted language about you the hirer/non fault driver are liable for the cost of the hire up to what the court deems the third party is liable because a clever insurer's barrister argued that under the previous terms the non-fault driver never had a liability for the hire and the hire company itself was too remote. Hence again a credit hire company sues in your name but that stems from the contract rather than legislation. 

mgfvvc

DullGreyGuy said:

But your insurer sues in your name.

Exactly this. The insurer is not a party to the incident and can not sue the other parties in the incident in their own right. They can only sue as an agent for the insured party. The insured party can not subsequently sue the same party again.