Foreign driver in foreign car crash in Ireland - what next?

CiniO

A friend of mine asked what to do on behalf of a his friend who had a crash in Ireland in his Polish registered car.
He was a tourist as he doesn't live here.

There were 3 cars (A, B and C) driving on a straight road . It was the N road with 100km/h speed limit. First car A was doing about 70km/h. My friend's friend was driving the last car C and started to overtake two cars in front of him.
At the moment he was on the opposite lane overtaking car B, then car B decided to overtake car A and started manouver without looking, which ended in pushing car C onto the ditch.

No one was injured, but they called the guards, as my friend's friend had no clue what to do.
Gardai arrived, took both drivers details, and said it was all they could do, and that decision about liability for accident will be up to insurance companies, and that both of them should contact their insurance company.

My friend's friend was a bit shocked, as he didn't know it works this way.
But now he has no idea what should he do. He assumes it was car B driver fault. And I must say I do believe that's the case.

However there is no point in contacting his Polish insurance company, as they have nothing to do with it, if it wasn't his fault.

Can he claim straight away from other party insurance company for damage to his car, or what else can he do?

Jimdagym

He should notify his insurance anyway, regardless of whether or not they will be involved. I also wouldn't be sure he is completely blameless. He was driving on the wrong side of the road when the accident occurred wasn't he?

Marcusm

Not sure of the rules in Poland but generally insurance policies (car, home, public liability etc) will generally require immediate notification of any dent which might give rise to a claim. This is one of those situations.

Sounds like car B will have acted negligently in moving across without checking that the lane was clear. However, my interpretation of your post is that your friend was attempting a double overtake. That is generally viewed as being implicitly excluded under the rules of the road. That may mean that your friend would be regarded as having contributed to the accident.

CiniO

Marcusm wrote: »

Not sure of the rules in Poland but generally insurance policies (car, home, public liability etc) will generally require immediate notification of any dent which might give rise to a claim. This is one of those situations.

It's definitely not required with a Polish policy.
You only contact them to claim. No need to contact them in any other case.

Sounds like car B will have acted negligently in moving across without checking that the lane was clear. However, my interpretation of your post is that your friend was attempting a double overtake. That is generally viewed as being implicitly excluded under the rules of the road. That may mean that your friend would be regarded as having contributed to the accident.

So generally speaking is it not OK to overtake 2 cars at one time, while they drive one behind the other?

In short he was overtaking two cars, while the second one started his own overtaking manouver without making sure he wasn't being overtaken at the moment.
Something like on the pictures:

CiniO

Jimdagym wrote: »

He should notify his insurance anyway, regardless of whether or not they will be involved.

No need to notify them about anything. They wouldn't be interested.

I also wouldn't be sure he is completely blameless. He was driving on the wrong side of the road when the accident occurred wasn't he?

It was the correct side of the road for overtaking.

BrianD3

Marcusm wrote: »

However, my interpretation of your post is that your friend was attempting a double overtake. That is generally viewed as being implicitly excluded under the rules of the road.

Generally viewed by whom? And where's the evidence supporting the view that "double overtaking" is not allowed under the ROTR?

Jimdagym

CiniO wrote: »

No need to notify them about anything. They wouldn't be interested.



It was the correct side of the road for overtaking.

They will be very interested as to why he failed to report if he is in any way to blame. Your friend decided to drive on the wrong side of the road. That means he is in some way responsible for the accident.

Stinicker

Car A is ultimately responsible for being an idiot driving at 70km/h on a good road where 100km is the speed limit. However legally Car B (the polish car) is responsible but I hope it was on a broken white line where overtaking was allowed.

Car A should have been breathalyzed at the scene if he/she had the manners to stop, although knowing such drivers they are in a world of their own busy puttering along at whatever speed they feel like oblivious to the rest of the world around them.

CiniO

Stinicker wrote: »

Car A is ultimately responsible for being an idiot driving at 70km/h on a good road where 100km is the speed limit. However legally Car B (the polish car) is responsible but I hope it was on a broken white line where overtaking was allowed.

Hmm.
According to my description Polish car was car C, not B as you think.

On the picture above -
Car A - Blue
Car B - Red
Car C (Polish car) - Green.

CiniO

Jimdagym wrote: »

They will be very interested as to why he failed to report if he is in any way to blame.

No need to report before hand. If there is the claim, then they will handle it. They don't need to know in advance.
Trust me - I know Polish regulations relating to this.

Your friend decided to drive on the wrong side of the road. That means he is in some way responsible for the accident.

I'm not trying to justify my friend. He's not even my friend. It's my friend's friend. I don't know him at all.

But what you are saying doesn't make sense to me in general.
If you are overtaking, you are automatically driving on the wrong side of the road.
Are you trying to say, that if there is any accident where someone is overtaking, it always that person's fault no matter what, as he was on the wrong side of the road?

Jimdagym

CiniO wrote: »

No need to report before hand. If there is the claim, then they will handle it. They don't need to know in advance.
Trust me - I know Polish regulations relating to this.



I'm not trying to justify my friend. He's not even my friend. It's my friend's friend. I don't know him at all.

But what you are saying doesn't make sense to me in general.
If you are overtaking, you are automatically driving on the wrong side of the road.
Are you trying to say, that if there is any accident where someone is overtaking, it always that person's fault no matter what, as he was on the wrong side of the road?

No, I'm not saying its his fault, I am saying its partially his fault. How much that is will be decided by the insurance companies or courts.

Stinicker

CiniO wrote: »

Hmm.
According to my description Polish car was car C, not B as you think.

On the picture above -
Car A - Blue
Car B - Red
Car C (Polish car) - Green.

Sorry my bad, your friend the polish guy is not at fault according to your description and it is upto him now to pursue Car B. Because he is polish dosen't mean he can't from Car B's insurance.

unkel

Marcusm wrote: »

your friend was attempting a double overtake. That is generally viewed as being implicitly excluded under the rules of the road

Eh?

In many cases it is safer to overtake multiple vehicles in one go rather than hop in after each overtake. Think about it. Say B is driving a safe distance (or less) from A. If you overtake B and hop back in, both the distances between you and A in front AND you and B in back are too short, forcing you and B to brake

In this case your friends friend is blameless if he was already fully overtaking with his indicator on. Many insurance cases are settled though because it's not easy to prove in black and white what happened - and related less savoury reasons...

Bigcheeze

CiniO wrote: »

He was a tourist as he doesn't live here.

Yeah sure he was, because people have been driving here from Poland for years for their two weeks of sun. :rolleyes:

Marcusm

BrianD3 wrote: »

Generally viewed by whom? And where's the evidence supporting the view that "double overtaking" is not allowed under the ROTR?

It's been stated by other people on here about 10 times in here without argument (not my view or my action per se). The "implicitly" point is that the rotr set out a number of scenarios and always refer to the "vehicle" rather than vehicles. Not leading to a conclusion but worthwhile eing careful with disclosure!

I'd still say the op's friend's friend should inform his insurer as unless car B admits liability, it might be worthwhile having soeone else who has skin in the game!

Jimdagym

Bigcheeze wrote: »

Yeah sure he was, because people have been driving here from Poland for years for their two weeks of sun. :rolleyes:

Seriously?

Marcusm

Bigcheeze wrote: »

Yeah sure he was, because people have been driving here from Poland for years for their two weeks of sun. :rolleyes:

With lots of family potentially here, it's quite believeable. People drive much further, look at that poor Romanian family who cae over to drive their daughter's body back.

BrianD3

Marcusm wrote: »

It's been stated by other people on here about 10 times in here without argument (not my view or my action per se). The "implicitly" point is that the rotr set out a number of scenarios and always refer to the "vehicle" rather than vehicles. Not leading to a conclusion but worthwhile eing careful with disclosure!

Fair enough but people do say things here that are dubious or just plain wrong eg the "you have to use a 4x4 to tow a twin axle trailer" myth is one that crops up again and again.

Marcusm

BrianD3 wrote: »

Fair enough but people do say things here that are dubious or just plain wrong eg the "you have to use a 4x4 to tow a twin axle trailer" myth is one that crops up again and again.

Don't burst my bubble; my father tod me hat was true and he's not around now for me to ask him to prove it.

CiniO

Bigcheeze wrote: »

Yeah sure he was, because people have been driving here from Poland for years for their two weeks of sun. :rolleyes:

Please don't litter the thread, as this is actually completely irrelevant to the main subject.

CiniO

Stinicker wrote: »

Sorry my bad, your friend the polish guy is not at fault according to your description and it is upto him now to pursue Car B. Because he is polish dosen't mean he can't from Car B's insurance.

So I understand he can claim straight from car B's insurance.

The problem which I was thinking about, is who is actually going to decide about which driver is to blame.

In Ireland it's insurance companies who decide - they must work together then.
However in Poland it works different - insurance companies don't decide about the blame. They are just for paying for claims - that's it.
So his Polish insurance company is not going to do anything about it.

In that case it looks like it's all up to car B's insurance (Irish) which while being the only one side in the case, will probably do anything to put the blame on my friend's friend.

Do you reckon he could maybe contact MIBI so they could represent him while dealing with this claim.
Or where else?
In case car's B insurance will decide it was not car's B fault, then only option for him will be probably to go to court in Ireland, which considering the fact he doesn't live he will be probably not even worth it. (it will be cheaper to just forget about his car).

Any ideas?

CiniO

Marcusm wrote: »

It's been stated by other people on here about 10 times in here without argument (not my view or my action per se). The "implicitly" point is that the rotr set out a number of scenarios and always refer to the "vehicle" rather than vehicles. Not leading to a conclusion but worthwhile eing careful with disclosure!

Hmm that's actually interesting.

The question remains, how is anyone going to prove he was overtaking multiple vehicles, as accident happend while he was overtaking the first one.
He can always say he was planning to overtake only one.

I'd still say the op's friend's friend should inform his insurer as unless car B admits liability, it might be worthwhile having soeone else who has skin in the game!

That's the problem which I wrote about above.
His insurance company are not going to do anything.
Their only resposibility is to pay for the claims.
They are not going to be doing any dispute with other insurance companies.

dr.fuzzenstein

The ROTR seem to indicate that when overtaking, one has to give way to vehicles already overtaking from behind.
http://www.drivingschoolireland.com/good-driving.html#4
and the RSA seems to agree
http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html

Car B is at fault.

Marcusm

CiniO wrote: »

That's the problem which I wrote about above.
His insurance company are not going to do anything.
Their only resposibility is to pay for the claims.
They are not going to be doing any dispute with other insurance companies.

CiniO

How does that work in practice in Poland; surely the insurers must have some level of discussion as to how to apportion liability. Do they have in house loss adjusters or use external advisers? Is it the case that in Poland, the police report specifies the party in fault? Even then, what if the police are not called? I would expect that they would have to get involved and might have to negotiate with one another although this might be invisible to Polish motorists. Insurers don't generally take a passive approach to claims except de minimis ones.

Marcusm

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The ROTR seem to indicate that when overtaking, one has to give way to vehicles already overtaking from behind.
http://www.drivingschoolireland.com/good-driving.html#4
and the RSA seems to agree
http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html

Car B is at fault.

That's fairly conclusive; apologies for any diversion.

CiniO

Marcusm wrote: »

CiniO

How does that work in practice in Poland; surely the insurers must have some level of discussion as to how to apportion liability. Do they have in house loss adjusters or use external advisers? Is it the case that in Poland, the police report specifies the party in fault? Even then, what if the police are not called? I would expect that they would have to get involved and might have to negotiate with one another although this might be invisible to Polish motorists. Insurers don't generally take a passive approach to claims except de minimis ones.

Usually it's the police who decides who was liable for accident.
They come to the accident spot when called, interview the drivers, check any traces, ask witness if there is any, and then decide whose fault was it, write the statement and give it to drivers.
Then the person who was not at fault, can claim from the other driver's insurance company for a damage. All he needs to claim is to fill in the form, and attach police report.

In case no one was injured, there is no need to call police, but still most people would call them unless there's only some small damage or case is really clear.
In that case, drivers can decide about who is to blame between themselves, and person who was at fault must write a statement that he accepts blame and give it to other driver.
Then other driver can claims from the first driver (the one who was to blame) insurance, by applying to his insurance company, filling the form and attaching the statement signed by the other driver.

Generally speaking that's it.

PS - if you don't agree with police judgement about the blame, than you can always go to court, so they can decide.

Insurance companies has nothing to do with deciding about the blame.

Tigger

Marcusm wrote: »

It's been stated by other people on here about 10 times in here without argument (not my view or my action per se). The "implicitly" point is that the rotr set out a number of scenarios and always refer to the "vehicle" rather than vehicles. Not leading to a conclusion but worthwhile eing careful with disclosure!

I'd still say the op's friend's friend should inform his insurer as unless car B admits liability, it might be worthwhile having soeone else who has skin in the game!

at that time car c was only overtaking 1 car
car b
he was then probably going to pull in between car a and b and the overtake car a

unless car b was tailgating

also you can overtake multiples of cars at a time AS LONG AS ITS SAFE

Bigcheeze

CiniO wrote: »

Please don't litter the thread, as this is actually completely irrelevant to the main subject.

It's entirely relevant to the thread because if he's living here his Polish insurance isn't valid.

Bigcheeze

Marcusm wrote: »

With lots of family potentially here, it's quite believeable. People drive much further, look at that poor Romanian family who cae over to drive their daughter's body back.

It's possible yes but unlikely.

CiniO

Bigcheeze wrote: »

It's entirely relevant to the thread because if he's living here his Polish insurance isn't valid.

Says who?

Of course it is valid, no matter where he lives.

Del2005

Bigcheeze wrote: »

It's entirely relevant to the thread because if he's living here his Polish insurance isn't valid.

He isn't living here so it's entirely irrelevant. Even if he was have you read his insurance policy? Not every country has such backward insurance policies as us.

There may be some people living here avoiding VRT, but tarring every non national in a non Irish reg'd car as a tax cheat is a big leap. Since there are properly more Irish people avoiding it.

Marcusm

Bigcheeze wrote: »

It's entirely relevant to the thread because if he's living here his Polish insurance isn't valid.

His insurance would most certainly remain valid as far as third parties are concerned although if he's in breach of his policy, the insurance company might be able to recover any costs from him. A distinction with a difference.

Bigcheeze

Del2005 wrote: »

He isn't living here so it's entirely irrelevant. Even if he was have you read his insurance policy? Not every country has such backward insurance policies as us.

It doesn't allow him to live in another country. i'll guarantee you that.

Del2005 wrote: »

There may be some people living here avoiding VRT, but tarring every non national in a non Irish reg'd car as a tax cheat is a big leap. Since there are properly more Irish people avoiding it.

What's VRT got to do with insurance?

CiniO

Bigcheeze wrote: »

It doesn't allow him to live in another country. i'll guarantee you that.

Sorry, but you are wrong.

You seem to be very stubborn, but I'll take a bit of time to explain why are you wrong.

First of all all the third party car insurance policies in Poland are regulated by an Act. It makes it that every policy issued by every insurer is the same (offering exact the same cover and conditions), as it's the Law Act which describes what exactly these policies must offer.

Secondly it's not the driver who must insure the car, but the car owner. No matter who is driving, everyone is covered. Additionally every car is required to be covered at all times, no matter if it's used or not. Person responsible for this is the car owner. It's irrelevant where does owner live.

If you owned the car in Poland, it would be irrelevant that you live in Ireland. You would be responsible to make sure this car is insured. And this insurance would cover anyone to drive that car (including yourself) anywhere in Europe, and most other countries in the world (which signed Vienna convention about road traffic in 1968).

If you are going to argue me, prove I'm wrong.
Here is the Act which I mentioned. Quote the relevant piece.
If you need alway can use google translator.

Marcusm

Cinio

It seems that your friend's friend needs to identify the other party's insurance company and then find the polish claims representative for that company. This is required to exist under art 421 of the EU motor insurance directive to assist travelling motorists involved in claims overseas. The representative has to deal with you in your home country and native language should you require. It looks like most insurers appoint large brokers go carry out this function.

CiniO

Marcusm wrote: »

Cinio

It seems that your friend's friend needs to identify the other party's insurance company and then find the polish claims representative for that company. This is required to exist under art 421 of the EU motor insurance directive to assist travelling motorists involved in claims overseas. The representative has to deal with you in your home country and native language should you require. It looks like most insurers appoint large brokers go carry out this function.

All right.
That makes sense to me.
So generally speaking, he need to find out which insurance company is the other party insured with (f.e assume it's AXA Ireland) and then find a representative for this company in Poland (the company in Poland which represents AXA Ireland) and deal the whole case with them back in Poland.

Thanks for that.
I recalled now, I heard somewhere about those representatives, during other chat on Polish motor forum about a Polish guy who had an accident in Poland with a foreign car.
He didn't know where should he claim, and it came out as he had to find a representative for the other's party insurance company in Poland, and claim from them.

I only thought that it applies when you have an accident at home with foreign driver, instead of opposite like here - accident abroad.

Thanks a million, I'll let the guy know what to do.

Big Nasty

WTF is it with people and their high fcukin horses? :eek:

If you've nothing constructive to say fcuk off to another forum. :mad: