Uninsured Driver

beeno67

Not sure if this is the right forum but perhaps someone could help he.

A friend of mine (yes really not me) was in a very minor crash. Other driver was totally at fault and admitted liability. However my friends car will cost to be repaired. Problem is my friend (who was not at fault) did not have valid insurance. Does that make a difference. As I said other driver has admitted liability.

-Corkie-

Were the guards called.

tommy21

beeno67 wrote: »

Not sure if this is the right forum but perhaps someone could help he.

A friend of mine (yes really not me) was in a very minor crash. Other driver was totally at fault and admitted liability. However my friends car will cost to be repaired. Problem is my friend (who was not at fault) did not have valid insurance. Does that make a difference. As I said other driver has admitted liability.

Yes, it makes a huge difference unfortunately. (edit) Your friend may be reported to the authorities for driving without insurance and prosecuted, though they can still claim. And rightly so in my opinion. While not wanting to have someone get off for this type of offence, for the sake of argument the only way around this would be if the guards were not called and you agreed to settle outside of insurance. However, most people would refuse this if they knew the other person had no insurance. The question you should ask your friend though is why he was driving without insurance? If you had been in the car and badly injured, what then?

mathepac

tommy21 wrote: »

... And rightly so in my opinion.

+1

beeno67

tommy21 wrote: »

Yes, it makes a huge difference unfortunately. Once the other driver's insurance company figures this out, not only will they likely not pay, your friend may be reported to the authorities for driving without insurance and prosecuted. And rightly so in my opinion. While not wanting to have someone get off for this type of offence, for the sake of argument the only way around this would be if the guards were not called and you agreed to settle outside of insurance. However, most people would refuse this if they knew the other person had no insurance. The question you should ask your friend though is why he was driving without insurance? If you had been in the car and badly injured, what then?

Thanks for reply. I absolutely agree with you about the need for insurance but there wasn't much point me saying this to her. The guards were not called by the way.

tommy21

beeno67 wrote: »

Thanks for reply. I absolutely agree with you about the need for insurance but there wasn't much point me saying this to her. The guards were not called by the way.

Actually I just asked my father who is former solicitor. I was wrong in that your friend can still rightfully claim according to him from the other person's insurance if they have admitted full liability However this may lead (if it has not already given I presume they exchanged insurance details, even out-of-date ones) to a prosecution for driving without insurance if the person tries to claim. Not to be interpreted as legal advice, just an opinion. Ask a practising solicitor for clarification.

subway

it wont affect a claim if you are uninsured,
jesus some of the ****e that gets posted on here without any thought behind it

beeno67

subway wrote: »

it wont affect a claim if you are uninsured,
jesus some of the ****e that gets posted on here without any thought behind it

Thanks. And is their any risk in making a claim? Will she be reported for driving without insurance or is that beyond what insurance companies do?

MagicSean

I think its disgraceful that she can still claim. She shouldn't have been on the road. If she tries to claim the other insurance company will probably look for an abstract from the garda who went to the scene which would need her insurance details. It will probably come out that she wasn't insured. If she has any sense she will forget about any claim and take it as punishment for her irresponsible behaviour.

Atlantic Dawn

She shouldn't have been on the road and if the person she hit has a brain in their head they will have checked she doesn't have insurance and tell her to go and fcuk. It's low lifes like this that have decent folks insurance so high. I hope she doesn't get a cent and has her day in court with the max €1500 fine and 6 points for no insurance. Most likely when she gives the guy the quote for repairs he will decide to go through his insurance and that's when the fun will start as they will need to contact her non existant insurance company

Barr

The fact he was uninsured makes no difference in this case. The third party was liable so it comes out of his insurance.

Our man in Havana

To be safe from prosecution she can wait for 6 months to run then the Gardaí can do nothing.

She can delay claiming for long enough to allow the no insurance charge to go statute barred. Even if the other sides insurance try and report it to the Gardaí they will be powerless to act as it will be outside the statute of limitations. She will still be in time to claim for damage (6 years) or personal injury (2 years).

cml387

Surely,outside the wrongs and rights of the matter,if the OP's "friend" was totally blameless for the accident,if the other driver has admitted responsibility,and has agreed to pay for damages,then the guards will not be involved and your friend is home free and gets her car repaired etc. etc.

However if the other driver exchanged insurance details or whatever, they either
a)Discovered that the op's friend had no insurance and might go along the lines of "see you in court hah hah"

b) Will eventually find the insurance is invalid and leave it up to the insurance company to decide.

Incidentally, accepting full liability for an accident can be a dangerous move, your insurance company will not be happy.

slimjimmc

beeno67 wrote: »

Thanks. And is their any risk in making a claim? Will she be reported for driving without insurance or is that beyond what insurance companies do?

Very likely, if not by the insurance company then hopefully by the other driver. Many people, including myself, don't have much tolerance of uninsured drivers, especially considering the loading it puts on everyone else and the view that these chancers are really taking the p155.

Admission of liability at the side of the road is generally considered meaningless by ins. comapanies because some people tend to say anything when stressed.

Henry Ford III

2 totally separate issues here:-

1/. Civil issue. OP's pal is no responsible for damages as liabilty has been accepted by 3rd prty.

2/. No insurance issue. Not a good idea, wholly irresponsible.

Issue 2/. has no bearing on issue 1/. however.

firefly08

Your insurance is there to cover damage and injuries you cause to 3rd parties and their property, with your car. Not only do those 3rd parties not need to have insurance in order to claim against you, they don't even need to have a car. If you damage someone else's property or injure them with your car (by accident, while sober) your insurance pays. (As usual: not to be interpreted as legal advice etc.)

Greenmachine

You friend should be utterly ashamed for putting a claim in light of the circumstances. I hope they get nought.

2yung2adm

Barr wrote: »

The fact he was uninsured makes no difference in this case. The third party was liable so it comes out of his insurance.

Barr is totally right here.
Driving a car in a public place without a certificate of insurance is an offence under the Road Traffic Act.... unless of course you are a mega rich person and can afford a certificate of exemption.
Not holding a valid certificate of insurance cannot in any way affect a civil case for damages against the erring driver.

Also some posters here have stated that they should wait six months until the process through the courts for the criminal offence of Driving without insurance to be statute barred.
There is no need to wait six months.
If it is alleged to a Garda that a particular person was driving a MPV in a public place without the required cover, or where the Garda himself saw the person driving, the Garda has ONE MONTH from the time of alleged driving to make the demand.
There is no offence without the demand being made and there is no need to wait six months.
I really do not know how some people can post statements as fact when it is so incorrect and cannot be shown to be correct.

jimmycrackcorm

Greenmachine wrote: »

You friend should be utterly ashamed for putting a claim in light of the circumstances. I hope they get nought.

Why should they get nothing? I they are blameless in this accident? Having no insurance is a seperate legal issue. If you were to climb down the very steep ladder off your horse then you might have suggested that the person should be prosecuted as well as getting compensated for the damage done.

CiniO

k_mac wrote: »

I think its disgraceful that she can still claim. She shouldn't have been on the road. If she tries to claim the other insurance company will probably look for an abstract from the garda who went to the scene which would need her insurance details. It will probably come out that she wasn't insured. If she has any sense she will forget about any claim and take it as punishment for her irresponsible behaviour.

Why disgraceful?
Driving without insurance is an offense, the same as million other things that almost every one do on the road - even driving with fog light on during good weather.

It puts driver on huge risk, in case if he/she will cause some serious damage, he/she might have to pay off for the rest of his/hers life.

But in this particular case, fault was at others person which had insurance.

She should definitely claim, for a damage that the other person caused to her.

And also she should be prepared to be penalised for driving without insurace.

Andrew33

beeno67 wrote: »

Not sure if this is the right forum but perhaps someone could help he.

A friend of mine (yes really not me) was in a very minor crash. Other driver was totally at fault and admitted liability. However my friends car will cost to be repaired. Problem is my friend (who was not at fault) did not have valid insurance. Does that make a difference. As I said other driver has admitted liability.

The best thing your "pal" can do is keep their head down and say nothing,
if "she" tries to claim against a legitimate insured driver, all I can hope is that your "pal" gets prosecuted for no insurance. The laws in this country need to be changed to protect law abiding citizens fom your "pal".

Ireland needs to adopt a Swiss style arrangement where the person is reg'd and insured to drive any vehicle.

CiniO

Andrew33 wrote: »

The best thing your "pal" can do is keep their head down and say nothing,
if "she" tries to claim against a legitimate insured driver, all I can hope is that your "pal" gets prosecuted for no insurance. The laws in this country need to be changed to protect law abiding citizens fom your "pal".

Why would she keep her head down and say nothing?
She had an accident not at her fault, so she should be compensated for it.
It's really straight forward.

Our man in Havana

All she needs to do is lay low for 1 month and then claim. No risk then.

2yung2adm

Andrew33 wrote: »

The best thing your "pal" can do is keep their head down and say nothing,
if "she" tries to claim against a legitimate insured driver, all I can hope is that your "pal" gets prosecuted for no insurance. The laws in this country need to be changed to protect law abiding citizens fom your "pal".

Ireland needs to adopt a Swiss style arrangement where the person is reg'd and insured to drive any vehicle.

If the demand by a garda to produce the insurance or certificate of exemption is not made within a month of the time of the alleged offence no prosecution can be initiated

johndaman66

2yung2adm wrote: »

Driving a car in a public place without a certificate of insurance is an offence under the Road Traffic Act.... unless of course you are a mega rich person and can afford a certificate of exemption.

I was of the understanding that this particular option has not being available for some considerable time in Republic of Ireland regardless of how mega rich you are but I stand to be corrected.

Our man in Havana

johndaman66 wrote: »

I was of the understanding that this particular option has not being available for some considerable time in Republic of Ireland regardless of how mega rich you are but I stand to be corrected.

The option exists still. Many public bodies such as CIE etc still self insure.

Andrew33

CiniO wrote: »

Why would she keep her head down and say nothing?
She had an accident not at her fault, so she should be compensated for it.
It's really straight forward.

Why should she be compensated?? She has NO right to be on the road, this is not a case of a pedestrian getting knocked down, what if your "friend" had a collision with a pedestrian? would you be on here "boo hoo'ing" abut uninsured pedestrians? You need to seriously cop on and join the human race. its people like her that has insurance in this country so high, I sincerely hope she gets everything due to her.

Our man in Havana

I sincerely hope she gets everything due to her.

The compensation she deserves then.

2yung2adm

johndaman66 wrote: »

I was of the understanding that this particular option has not being available for some considerable time in Republic of Ireland regardless of how mega rich you are but I stand to be corrected.

Haddockman has answered this and he is correct. The gardai do not hold certificates of Insurance. Another company was John A. Woods.

Andrew33

Haddockman wrote: »

The option exists still. Many public bodies such as CIE etc still self insure.

CIE no longer exist but I know what you mean, DUBLIN BUS/BUS EIREANN/IRISH RAIL/GARDAI can not get cover from existing companies(they're not fools) so its us the tax payer who picks up the insurance tab.

johndaman66

The time somebody ran into the back of my car I made a claim myself from their insurance company without getting my insurance company involved at any stage. The other party admitted responsibility straight away and I took his insurance details but all the same he took my insurance details also. I rang for the Guardi and was told they should be on the scene in the next few minutes. Low and behold they arrived an hour and a half later. They took a statement from both parties and both our particulars. Again other party admitted liability at this point. I assume Guardi were not called in the case of your friends accident.

Even though I fully made the claim myself I was of the understanding at the time that I could have left my own insurance company make the claim on my behalf. For all intents and purposes the insurance company I made the claim from never needed or requested my insurance deatails at any stage whatsoever.

On a side note I suggest you tell your friend to cop her act on and stop driving without insurance. Such carry on makes insurance more expensive for the rest of us and can make life very difficult if such a driver were to hit us. I don't have much time for it really. For that matter its unlikely she would last too long on the road until the long arm of the law would catch up with her and the penalties are quite extreme and rightfully so. Hopefully this might be a wake up call.

johndaman66

Haddockman wrote: »

The option exists still. Many public bodies such as CIE etc still self insure.

2yung2adm wrote: »

Haddockman has answered this and he is correct. The gardai do not hold certificates of Insurance. Another company was John A. Woods.

Thanks for clearing that one up folks. I assume that the bond would be quite high for private social, domestic and pleasure use as in millions?

CiniO

Andrew33 wrote: »

Why should she be compensated??

Because someone caused damage to her property. You must agree that's true.

She has NO right to be on the road, this is not a case of a pedestrian getting knocked down, what if your "friend" had a collision with a pedestrian? would you be on here "boo hoo'ing" abut uninsured pedestrians? You need to seriously cop on and join the human race. its people like her that has insurance in this country so high, I sincerely hope she gets everything due to her.

She has a right of being on the road the same as everyone else. It's a public place and everyone can use it.
Of course, if someone is using it against some rules commiting an offense (like here driving without insurance) he should be prosecuted for this. But law clearly describes what is the penalty for driving without insurance. And that the penalty she can get.
You can't just add to the penalty lack of compesnation from someone who caused damage to her, just because you don't like what she was doing.

Imagine you are standing in public place (like bus stop) and smoking cigarette. That's illegal. You can be prosecuted.
But if someone goes there, and punches you in your face, would you accept it. Because to be honest, if you are smoking cigarette, you were not allowed by law to be there (on the bus stop) so in your logic, you couldn't accuse anyone for punching you in the face, could you?

It's just a different example, but the same logic as you presented before.

Andrew33

I am seriously fed up with this thread.
If a person broke into a building site and sustained an injury,
would they sue the owners of the site?
Ask yourself a moral question.

Greenmachine

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Why should they get nothing? I they are blameless in this accident? Having no insurance is a seperate legal issue. If you were to climb down the very steep ladder off your horse then you might have suggested that the person should be prosecuted as well as getting compensated for the damage done.

It is not a higher than thou attitude. If he wasn't driving his car at the time. He wouldn't have been involved in the accident. That wouldn't matter a great deal if he had insurance.
The fact he doesn't changes the situation. Legally he might be in a position to put in a claim. Doesn't mean that morally he is entitled to.

Say someone breaks into your house and hurts themselves. The fact that he is burglarising your house is addressed completly seperately to the fact that he might try to claim off your insurance. He might even get the benefit of probation etc etc.

There is no such way out if he makes a claim against you. You will just ahve to take it on the chin doesn't make it right. Does it.

The other driver is insane for accepting liability even if he was at fault.
Would love to have seen the OP friend reaction to that.

Things would not look good for him at all.

Vertakill

CiniO wrote: »

Because someone caused damage to her property. You must agree that's true.



She has a right of being on the road the same as everyone else. It's a public place and everyone can use it.
Of course, if someone is using it against some rules commiting an offense (like here driving without insurance) he should be prosecuted for this. But law clearly describes what is the penalty for driving without insurance. And that the penalty she can get.
You can't just add to the penalty lack of compesnation from someone who caused damage to her, just because you don't like what she was doing.

Imagine you are standing in public place (like bus stop) and smoking cigarette. That's illegal. You can be prosecuted.
But if someone goes there, and punches you in your face, would you accept it. Because to be honest, if you are smoking cigarette, you were not allowed by law to be there (on the bus stop) so in your logic, you couldn't accuse anyone for punching you in the face, could you?

It's just a different example, but the same logic as you presented before.

Troll?


This accident would never have occurred if the idiot without insurance obeyed the law.

I would love to listen in on the phone call she would be making toward the other persons insurance company.
Considering how unbelievably reluctant insurance companies are at paying out, I very much doubt it'd take much for them to avoid paying out and I'd imagine they'd report her in the process.

I hope she does try and claim though, for those reasons. Talk about, literally, adding insult to injury...

This is another reason why you never admit any kind of liability on the spot.

Dravokivich

Vertakill wrote: »

This accident would never have occurred if the idiot without insurance obeyed the law.

Or the person who admitted liability never crashed into the person without insurance?

djimi

I think people are letting their emotions confuse the issue here. There are two completely seperate issues in play:

1. The OPs friend was hit by another vehicle who apparently was at fault.

2. The OPs friend was driving without insurance.

One does not affect the other. You dont have to have insurance yourself to make a claim or to be compensated for damage caused by someone who was completely liable. There is a good chance however that if you do claim you will be found out to have been driving without insurance, and in this case I sincerely hope the OPs friend does get found out, but that does not change the fact that she is entitled to claim to have her car repaired.

Anan1

Vertakill wrote: »

Troll?

Play the ball, not the man.

beeno67

I love the attitude that seems to be prevelant on this site. Someone without insurance (which I fully accept is wrong) gets totally blasted yet on other threads speeding (and other illegal activity) seems to be, if not celebrated then certainly accepted. I know who I would wish to come accross while driving.

Thanks to all who replied.

Our man in Havana

djimi wrote: »

I think people are letting their emotions confuse the issue here. There are two completely seperate issues in play:

1. The OPs friend was hit by another vehicle who apparently was at fault.

2. The OPs friend was driving without insurance.

One does not affect the other. You dont have to have insurance yourself to make a claim or to be compensated for damage caused by someone who was completely liable. There is a good chance however that if you do claim you will be found out to have been driving without insurance, and in this case I sincerely hope the OPs friend does get found out, but that does not change the fact that she is entitled to claim to have her car repaired.

She only has to wait 1 month and then she is clear.

FlorientRei

I think that in ireland, it is compulsory to have a valid car insurance. You have to look closer at your renewal deadlines to be insured all the time.
I am currently wondering which insurer i should go for to insure my new car, having it insured is not enoughm, you have to pay attention to the cover too.
in the case of your friend, I think he is in trouble , I hope he didn't have to pay that much money for his accident.

djimi

Haddockman wrote: »

She only has to wait 1 month and then she is clear.

How long do you have after an accident before you can claim off insurance? Do you not have to notify the insurance company immediately? Even if the other person notifies their insurance company right away is there not a chance they might start asking questions like who is the other party insured with?

MagicSean

CiniO wrote: »

Why disgraceful?
Driving without insurance is an offense, the same as million other things that almost every one do on the road - even driving with fog light on during good weather.

It puts driver on huge risk, in case if he/she will cause some serious damage, he/she might have to pay off for the rest of his/hers life.

But in this particular case, fault was at others person which had insurance.

She should definitely claim, for a damage that the other person caused to her.

And also she should be prepared to be penalised for driving without insurace.

It's disgraceful because she shouldn't be on the road in the first place to have her property damaged. How is this any different from a person claiming from a property owner for an injury sustained during the course of a burglary? It's the kind of civil case which makes a mockery of the law and those who bring the case and those who represent them should be ashamed.

MagicSean

beeno67 wrote: »

I love the attitude that seems to be prevelant on this site. Someone without insurance (which I fully accept is wrong) gets totally blasted yet on other threads speeding (and other illegal activity) seems to be, if not celebrated then certainly accepted. I know who I would wish to come accross while driving.

Thanks to all who replied.

WHo would you rather have crash into you?

robtri

It simple really lads...

She has every right to claim for damages to her property, whether she was insured or not does not come into this equation..

the only thing your friend has to consider is that if she does claim off the other driver who was in the wrong, she runs the risk of been reported to the Gardai for driving without insurance.

At the end of the day, your friend has to weigh up whether the cost of repairs to her car is worth the risk of been found out and brought to court , fined and have a load of points on her licence.

djimi

beeno67 wrote: »

I love the attitude that seems to be prevelant on this site. Someone without insurance (which I fully accept is wrong) gets totally blasted yet on other threads speeding (and other illegal activity) seems to be, if not celebrated then certainly accepted. I know who I would wish to come accross while driving.

Thanks to all who replied.

The speeder? At least if they hit you and theyre insured you dont have to fight tooth and nail to try and get financially reimbursed...

beeno67

k_mac wrote: »

WHo would you rather have crash into you?

The uninsured of course by a million miles. What kind of idiot would prefer to be hit by someone speeding than someone doing the normal speed?

djimi

beeno67 wrote: »

The uninsured of course by a million miles. What kind of idiot would prefer to be hit by someone speeding than someone doing the normal speed?

Assume for a second were talking about a 30mph zone; someone doing 25mph uninsured is probably going to do more or less the same damage as someone doing 35mph, but at least if the person who is doing 35mph is insured its a lot less hassle me to get my car repaired and to be financially reimbursed.

Obviously Id rather not be hit by either. And I dont think there are many on here who condone or champion speeding tbh, not at dangerous levels anyway.

Our man in Havana

djimi wrote: »

How long do you have after an accident before you can claim off insurance? Do you not have to notify the insurance company immediately? Even if the other person notifies their insurance company right away is there not a chance they might start asking questions like who is the other party insured with?

Nope. She has 6 years to claim for damage to the car and 2 years for personal injury. So waiting a month will allow her to escape from the no insurance charge. It may be in the other guys terms and conditions of insurance that he inform them immediately, but this is not binding on any third party to the incident.

beeno67

djimi wrote: »

Assume for a second were talking about a 30mph zone; someone doing 25mph uninsured is probably going to do more or less the same damage as someone doing 35mph, but at least if the person who is doing 35mph is insured its a lot less hassle me to get my car repaired and to be financially reimbursed.

Obviously Id rather not be hit by either. And I dont think there are many on here who condone or champion speeding tbh, not at dangerous levels anyway.

Yes. Now assume one driver doing 120kph and the other doing 80kph.