help please car accident

gwarren_2

Hi hope someone will be able to answer my query
my 17 year old son took my car for a spin after 4 driving lessons without my permission and hit a parked car,no full licence or insurance. i was out at the time, he has been taken to court and fined and points on his licence for the two of the above offence.
My insurance are now claiming off me 995.00 for the damage to the other car, which i know they have a right to claim.
my argument with them is two things it could have been repaired for 500.00 as the third party got a quote ,when i told the insurance i was told to go through them thats what i pay it for, if i can get proof they will honour the 500.00 been round to the house and asked but no luck.
second shouldn't they be claiming off my son?
If i do have to pay can i offer a monthly payment?

anewman

Think of it the other way. If someone other than your son took your car without consent and hit another car, would your insurance company be coming after you for the money? I don't know that him being your son changes anything.

Did he get charged for taking without consent?

Sparky67

Not sure about this - technically your son was an uninsured driver and the third party would make a claim against the MIB (Motor Insurers Bureau) which pays out for uninsured and untraced drivers.

But, your insurance "touches" the vehicle. You say he was charged for no insurance and no full licence, but not taking without consent. In that case, the insurance might be liable but will then look to recover their loss from you as this claim is outside of their contract with you. If it had been a stranger driving, then the vehicle would have been stolen and the claim would not touch your insurance, but in this case it is not stolen.

The insurers aren't going to pursue your 17 year old son for their losses!

You would then have to recover your loss from the driver through the civil courts, but as it's your son, there's little point in that (although you might like to make him pay a contribution to the damage he's caused!)

LandyAndy

The only person who deserves any sympathy in this is the poor s0d whose car was hit by your idiot son.

Never mind wriggling just put yourself in their position and ask how you'd like the look of your actions.

Your son should have received a substantial ban IMO.

gwarren_2

LandyAndy wrote: »

The only person who deserves any sympathy in this is the poor s0d whose car was hit by your idiot son.

Never mind wriggling just put yourself in their position and ask how you'd like the look of your actions.

Your son should have received a substantial ban IMO.

my reply

yes I do sympathise with them and he was an idiot but that wasn't my question.
the judge decided his penalty, and if you read what I put it wasn't MY ACTIONS, but I am paying the penalty.
After 20 years driving and never a point on my licence, you have read it wrong IMO

gwarren_2

Think of it the other way. If someone other than your son took your car without consent and hit another car, would your insurance company be coming after you for the money? I don't know that him being your son changes anything.



Did he get charged for taking without consent?[/quote]




No he never got charged for taking without consent , only the other two offences

Sparky67

As I've said previously, I think that's why your insurance have paid out but are looking to recover their losses - you have "permitted" the use of the vehicle and the insurers will have to pay up, but their policy with you doesn't cover your son, hence that's why they are looking to recover their losses from you. As I said previously, if he had been charged with TWOK it might have been different.

He has been punished by the law, but you are right in that you are now being penalised although you did nothing wrong. I would make sure your son makes a contribution to the cost of the repairs.

Your son did a very silly thing and was lucky in that no-one was seriously hurt or more damage was done. There's many decent parents out there, who do their best to ensure their kids are well brought up, but they then nevertheless do something stupid as a teenager! I don't think you are looking for sympathy or trying to get out of it, but as a parent of a one-time wayward teenager, I can understand your frustration at being punished for your son's moment of madness. Fortunately for most of us, the stupid things our kids get up to as teenagers don't end up costing us the best part of £1K!

Lets hope that this teaches him a lesson!

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Does your son live with you? If so, make him pay it, and any difference in your future premiums.

If he doesn't pay up then kick him out and let him pay his own way in life.

gardner1

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Does your son live with you? If so, make him pay it, and any difference in your future premiums.

If he doesn't pay up then kick him out and let him pay his own way in life.

excellent idea

Yorkshire-Lady_3

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Does your son live with you? If so, make him pay it, and any difference in your future premiums.

If he doesn't pay up then kick him out and let him pay his own way in life.

:T :T :T :T :T :T

anewman

gwarren wrote: »

No he never got charged for taking without consent , only the other two offences

I suspect this is why the insurance company is coming after you. I suspect the question will have been asked at some point in the legal process and you may have been trying to protect your son, but it may have been in your and his best interests to state he took it without any consent on your behalf, as I believe you can get points and fines etc too for allowing an unlicensed, uninsured driver use your car.

I suspect the best way to handle this now is as described above, make him pay. On the perspective that he should have been punished more, I think for most reasonable sensible 17 year olds (i.e. not a ch@v after an ASBO to tell all his mates) ending up in court and being fined with points is enough of a punishment to make sure it never happens again. IMO the worst thing to happen would have been for him to have no accident as he'd have come back and done the same again, and an annoyed parent might not have the same clout as a court hearing.