Insurance problem

Eliza Lynch

If I have a crash while a provisional driver does my insurance cover me, no one else was involved, I have comprehensive and Ihad applied for my test.

PCPhoto

you would have to check you actual policy - some insurance providers have "loopholes" written into their policies which would mean that if you are breaking the law your policy is null and void.

some insurance providers will cover you even if you do break the law and drive without a full licenced driver.

(Hope I dont sound like a pr1ck pointing out the breaking the law part - my GF is learning to drive a car at the moment and will only get in the car WHEN someone with a full licence can go with her, which basically means she will only drive at weekends - if she's lucky)

Max Power1

AFAIK you are legally entitled to 3rd party insurance (as a statutory minumum) even when driving drunk, driving unacompanied on a provisional etc. The rest the insurance company can weasel out of paying once they have the necessary loopholes (which im sure they do)

thebiglad

Are they aware you are only a provisional licence holder?

If so then I would expect your claim to be settled in full, don't make a big deal of it when claiming - just report the claim and answer all the questions truthfully.

seamus

PCPhoto wrote: »

some insurance providers have "loopholes" written into their policies which would mean that if you are breaking the law your policy is null and void.

It should probably be stickied, but your insurer is legally obliged to provide you with 3rd party cover, so long as you have not withheld any information from them when obtaining your policy.

There are no circumstances under which an insurance company can refuse to cover 3rd party damages because you broke the law. Provided that

1. You are driving the car specified in the insurance policy
2. You haven't been disqualified from driving
3. You've paid your premium (or part of, if you pay instalments)

then your insurance company is legally required to pay out all valid 3rd party claims against you, your insurance policy cannot be declared null and void and therefore you cannot be found guilty of driving without insurance.

However, as specified above, they can weasel out of paying any other damages if they discover that you were not sticking to any other part of your policy. They also have the legal right to pursue you for any 3rd party claims they had to pay out.

Most non-motor insurance policies can be declared invalid for any breach of the policy by the insured, however because motor insurance is mandatory, it is subject to slightly different rules and obligations on the part of the insurer.

Yes, stick in the claim, but if it's less than €5k, consider whether that's necessary.

MagicSean

Max Power1 wrote: »

AFAIK you are legally entitled to 3rd party insurance (as a statutory minumum) even when driving drunk, driving unacompanied on a provisional etc. The rest the insurance company can weasel out of paying once they have the necessary loopholes (which im sure they do)

I'd hardly call it weaseling. If someone crashes the car when they are drunk they should be taken for everything they have. Don't see why the insurance company should cover them. That's why policies are so high.

Anan1

k_mac wrote: »

If someone crashes the car when they are drunk they should be taken for everything they have. Don't see why the insurance company should cover them. That's why policies are so high.

Because in reality that would be punishing the victim.

mickdw

I take it you mean you didnt have the quaified driver with you?

Many of the major companies are covering driving unaccompanied due to the backlog in getting test dates etc. Still if you are with one of the dodgy insurers, they will be looking for any way out of paying you.

They would pay any third party claims but I dont think this applies here unless you damaged someone fence / wall etc going off the road.

mickdw

Anan1 wrote: »

Because in reality that would be punishing the victim.

Yes but IMO, they should in all cases chase the drunk driver through the courts for full recovery of cost outlay. They do in some cases but not nearly as much as I would expect given what we know about insurers. I guess they feel the driver might not have anything to pay them.

thebiglad

k_mac wrote: »

I'd hardly call it weaseling. If someone crashes the car when they are drunk they should be taken for everything they have. Don't see why the insurance company should cover them. That's why policies are so high.

Why exactly - someone is technically drunk if 1mg over the legal limit and will lose licence etc - it is demonstrated many times that drink affects different people in different ways.

To take your point on why not decline the claims or seek a full recovery in the following circumstances also

Driving whilst tired
On mobile phone
Changing CD/Radio
Turning round to quiet down children/pets in car

Dangerous/reckless driving (in these circumstances although AGS believe serious enough for prosecution there is no recourse by insurer)

To stop this going off on too much of a tangent, I do not condone drink driving in any aspect.

Anan1

mickdw wrote: »

Yes but IMO, they should in all cases chase the drunk driver through the courts for full recovery of cost outlay. They do in some cases but not nearly as much as I would expect given what we know about insurers. I guess they feel the driver might not have anything to pay them.

I think it'd be a tough one to enforce in reality. If they do that for drunks, then they'd have to do the same for speeders. And what about dangerous driving - where's the line between that and a genuine accident? They do make drunk drivers pay through the nose afterwards, though.

seamus

Anan1 wrote: »

where's the line between that and a genuine accident?

There's a fair argument to say that 99.9% of accidents happen after a law has been broken - be it excessive speed, dangerous overtaking, failure to yield, etc etc etc.
So if insurance companies were allowed to use "breaking the law" as a way of getting out of paying up, most claims would go unpaid and the entire point of mandatory insurance would be lost.

Eliza Lynch

Hi guys,
I just wanted to say thank you for the posts, I have recieved an evaluation from the insurance company and hope to get my cheque soon.
I am so relieved. I hope to do my test soon and not ever have to deal with this again.
I will update you if anythin else happens.:rolleyes:;)