Is the vehicle owner liable if a joyrider (GTA) crashes their car?

Worztron

Hello.

I don’t drive but is it true in Ireland that if someone steals a car, the thief can sue the owner of the car in the event of an accident. Since there are so many other idiotic laws in this country, I would not be surprised if this is the case.

Cookie_Monster

That couldn't be right!?

If the owner injurers the thief in their home through their own actions they can still be liable*, but how can they be liable if they don't even know their car has been stolen and have not taken any actions to cause such injury??

*which is also disgraceful

corktina

i suppose the injured party might be able to prove the Owner was negligent if he left the keys in it and it got stolen but I find it hard to believe that would be the case.

Paulw

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

If the owner injurers the thief in their home through their own actions they can still be liable

That was changed in the Home Defence Bill - Criminal Law Bill 2010. You have the right to use reasonable force in defending your home.

but43r

What if the car is not in roadworthy condition?

Cookie_Monster

but43r wrote: »

What if the car is not in roadworthy condition?

what if they knew that and had it in their driveway, off street with no intention of driving it...

Del2005

but43r wrote: »

What if the car is not in roadworthy condition?

Then the thief shouldn't be driving it:D

Paulw

I can't find any law that you put the liability on the car owner.

mickdw

Yep, a thief who crashes your car can claim for his injuries off your insurance or if the car was parked up and not insured, he could claim off you personally. Its absolutely crazy but thats the way it is. When I lived in dublin, I once changed my car and had the old one still outside the house. Was very afraid that someone would take it and then sue me as it was no longer insured. I had battery disconnected etc to try to disable it to be on the safe side.

slimjimmc

mickdw wrote: »

Yep, a thief who crashes your car can claim for his injuries off your insurance or if the car was parked up and not insured, he could claim off you personally. Its absolutely crazy but thats the way it is. When I lived in dublin, I once changed my car and had the old one still outside the house. Was very afraid that someone would take it and then sue me as it was no longer insured. I had battery disconnected etc to try to disable it to be on the safe side.

There was a Supreme Court appeal case Breslin v Corcoran & MIBI, there are numerous references to in on the web, here's one: link.

Synopsis:
Corcoran (driver) ran into a shop to get a sandwich and left the keys in the ignition. An unknown thief stole his car and hit Breslin who was a pedestrian.

Normally in such cases the MIBI would pay up but in this case the MIBI wanted Corcoran to pay because he was negligent in leaving the keys in the ignition.
The judge ruled that although Corcoran should have expected the car could be stolen and driven in a careless manner he could not have foreseen the thief would drive dangerously and therefore could not held responsible for the actions of the thief.

37. It is the negligent driving, not the taking of the car, which has caused the damage. It would have to be shown that the owner should have foreseen not merely the taking but also the negligent driving. There would have to be some basis in the evidence, such as that suggested by the learned trial judge, for a finding that the car, if stolen, was likely to be driven in such a way as to endanger others. Cars may be stolen for reasons which do not carry such implications. Some of these, though criminal, do not necessarily imply dangerous driving. The line would, on any view, have to be drawn somewhere. If a car were stolen for resale, the owner could scarcely be responsible for the driving of the purchaser, whether that person were honest or not.
38. In my view, there is nothing in the present case to suggest that the first-named defendant should have anticipated as a reasonable probability that the car, if stolen, would be driven so carelessly as to cause injury to another user of the road such as the plaintiff.
39. I would dismiss the appeal.

Worztron

mickdw wrote: »

Yep, a thief who crashes your car can claim for his injuries off your insurance or if the car was parked up and not insured, he could claim off you personally. Its absolutely crazy but thats the way it is. When I lived in dublin, I once changed my car and had the old one still outside the house. Was very afraid that someone would take it and then sue me as it was no longer insured. I had battery disconnected etc to try to disable it to be on the safe side.

This goes to prove that the law in this country is a joke. It protects the criminal and attacks the law abiding citizen. WTF? :mad:

ZENER

What happens if the thief crashes into another car ? Can the owner of the second car claim from the real owners insurance ?

Ken

Esel

Scene: Garda Traffic Checkpoint.

Garda: Do you have insurance for this vehicle?

Car Thief: No, but the lawful owner does.

Garda: Safe journey.

mickdw

ZENER wrote: »

What happens if the thief crashes into another car ? Can the owner of the second car claim from the real owners insurance ?

Ken

yep. Once a car is insured, it is insured regardless.

Sofiztikated

That's bull.

If someone hotwires my car, and smacks into someone elses car, my insurance is not going to pay our for someone else, I don't have a third party extension.

The person is not insured on my car, why would my insurance pay out? Hell my partner is not insured on my car.

Please provide a reference to a situation where a car is stolen, not one that some fool left his keys in his running car.

mickdw

Sofiztikated wrote: »

That's bull.

If someone hotwires my car, and smacks into someone elses car, my insurance is not going to pay our for someone else, I don't have a third party extension.

The person is not insured on my car, why would my insurance pay out? Hell my partner is not insured on my car.

Please provide a reference to a situation where a car is stolen, not one that some fool left his keys in his running car.

They would not be covered to drive your car however, the insurers are bound to cover any other party damages against the policy and they will pay. Also you had better hope they pay as if your car damaged another car whle stolen and thief runs off, would you like to receive the bill personally?

If it was the opposite situation and some car ploughed into you, you would want its insurance to pay regardless of who is driving.

Sofiztikated

mickdw wrote: »

They would not be covered to drive your car however, the insurers are bound to cover any other party damages against the policy and they will pay. Also you had better hope they pay as if your car damaged another car whle stolen and thief runs off, would you like to receive the bill personally?

If it was the opposite situation and some car ploughed into you, you would want its insurance to pay regardless of who is driving.

Bah. (My frustration isn't at you, mickdw, BTW)

Send the bill to billy big balls that took the car in the first place. Sue him for the damages.

mickdw

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Bah. (My frustration isn't at you, mickdw, BTW)

Send the bill to billy big balls that took the car in the first place. Sue him for the damages.

The insurers would of course be entitled to chase the thief afterwards for the loss however, they may not find the thief or realise that there is nothing to get off a coked up scum bag or whatever.

Scumbags can really f*ck up your sh1t you know!

Limerick Bandit

mickdw wrote: »

yep. Once a car is insured, it is insured regardless.

NOT TRUE, Do you live in Ireland? that is not how it works here!

Damien360

I am a bit lost here, can someone clarify :

Thief nicks car and crashes in to innocent person - your car costs covered by your insurance, and innocent party covered by MIBI (the central fund for insurers) for his car and personal injury. Your premium effected only by your claim for damage to your car.

Thief nicks your car and crashes. Looses his leg. - car costs again covered by your own insurance but if I am reading correctly, he can claim off your insurance for his injury or does he claim off MIBI. Your premium effected only by your claim for damage to your car. Which is correct ?

Begs a question why thief should be insured for any personal injury at all but I am sure that is ireland for you.

Limerick Bandit

mickdw wrote: »

Scumbags can really f*ck up your sh1t you know!

So can politicians, but who has cost you more in the past 10 years?

robtri

mickdw wrote: »

They would not be covered to drive your car however, the insurers are bound to cover any other party damages against the policy and they will pay. Also you had better hope they pay as if your car damaged another car whle stolen and thief runs off, would you like to receive the bill personally?

If it was the opposite situation and some car ploughed into you, you would want its insurance to pay regardless of who is driving.

this is not the way it works...

if a stolen car crashes into your property or you .. you claim of the MIBI and not of the stolen cars owners insurance...

and as far as i know a thief cannot claim of your policy for his own damages..... your policy doesnt cover that situation, if a thief was injurned they would have to take a case against the MIBI.. but I cannot see that being too successful..

mondeo

When I sold my Volvo s80 I was without a new car for about 2 weeks. I didn't bother telling my insurance "quinn direct" that I had sold it until I got a new car. They told me that I should have suspended my policy for the 2 weeks as I could be liable if the new owner crashed my old car. I found that hard to believe but you never know?

mickdw

Limerick Bandit wrote: »

NOT TRUE, Do you live in Ireland? that is not how it works here!

You misunderstand me.

While someone may not be named and not officially insured and could be taken to court for not being insured to drive the particular car, the insurer still has a duty to cover any 3rd person claims against the insured property.

mickdw

robtri wrote: »

this is not the way it works...

if a stolen car crashes into your property or you .. you claim of the MIBI and not of the stolen cars owners insurance...

and as far as i know a thief cannot claim of your policy for his own damages..... your policy doesnt cover that situation, if a thief was injurned they would have to take a case against the MIBI.. but I cannot see that being too successful..

There have been successful claims against vehicle insurers for injuries that occured in stolen cars.

The MIBI thing can get alittle complicated. When a car is uninsured, yes 100% MIBI deals with the claim.
When a car owner has a policy in force (albeit not covering thief), the actual insurer has a duty there. There may be agreements with MIBI also but I assure you this vehicle owner/insurer is liable for damage caused by their property.

Esel

mickdw wrote: »

There have been successful claims against vehicle insurers for injuries that occured in stolen cars....

.... When a car owner has a policy in force (albeit not covering thief), the actual insurer has a duty there. There may be agreements with MIBI also but I assure you this vehicle owner/insurer is liable for damage caused by their property.

Can you provide cites for this?

Del2005

It doesn't really mater who's policy covers it. We all pay for the MIBI from our policies so regardless the thief scumbag is claiming off the car's owner.

If the thief had to pay for it themselves, or have a permanent debt that reduced their dole to starvation levels till paid off, that would stop a lot of this. But the bleedin hearth liberals will say that's against their sub human rights.