Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Trailer insurance for twin axle car trailer

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Jayo2011
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Jayo2011


    Del2005 wrote: »
    Just for clarity. If you are driving outside the terms of your insurance policy then yes 3rd parties are covered., but the insurance companies can then sue you in civil court to recover the payout. They never used to but I think I read here that they have started and with the focus on premiums they are looking to recoup money more than ever. Civil courts are based on the balance of probabilities and there is no innocent till proven guilty.


    This was my fear, and which I wanted more clarity on. So basically if the claim by the 3rd party is substantial enough, they will assess your means (if you own something worthwhile seizing - your home etc), they will take it off you in court if after legal expenses, if it still seems worthwhile.


    As a side question, I do know in a criminal case, judge can order a bailiff to come after and seize your assets (including home). Can the judge do likewise in a Civil Claim? There is a difference between Crininal Courts and Civil Courts, just as there is a difference between the way the courts treat private individuals and businesses.

    Court appoint bailiffs will go after businesses for debt recovery on a regular basis, but usually judges are much more reluctant to go after private individuals except in extreme circumstances (criminal assault etc). Has this also changed?


  • Options
    #33
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users Posts: 1,503 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    I will text a barrister friend of mine, but I'd be amazed if a Judge ordered repossession of property in relation to an insurance claim like that. Seizing assets in an investigation of the proceeds of crime is very different to a costs issue between you and an insurance company. Your insurance policy is not secured against your property. Gardai can seize the car for no insurance, but not your house! Could you imagine the Joe Duffy show if that was to happen!! "Joe, I clipped a lad with my trailer and wrote off his car, now they've taken my dog and my house!"


  • Options
    #34
    Jayo2011
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Jayo2011


    TrailerBob wrote: »
    I will text a barrister friend of mine, but I'd be amazed if a Judge ordered repossession of property in relation to an insurance claim like that. Seizing assets in an investigation of the proceeds of crime is very different to a costs issue between you and an insurance company. Your insurance policy is not secured against your property. Gardai can seize the car for no insurance, but not your house! Could you imagine the Joe Duffy show if that was to happen!! "Joe, I clipped a lad with my trailer and wrote off his car, now they've taken my dog and my house!"

    Cheers mate


  • Options
    #35
    Eggs For Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,948 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    An insurance company is never going to go after your house, but if you have assets they will. No reason why they wouldn't pursue 5k, 10k or 15k off an ordinary Joe Soap if they broke policy conditions


  • Options
    #36
    Jayo2011
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭Jayo2011


    Eggs For Dinner wrote: »
    An insurance company is never going to go after your house, but if you have assets they will. No reason why they wouldn't pursue 5k, 10k or 15k off an ordinary Joe Soap if they broke policy conditions

    But if an accident caused injury to a 3rd party, where the third party sustained serious injuries, and were awarded a significant claim (100k+) they would definitely do their best to recoup their losses if the law permitted them. This is the reason I raised this post. Is there an insurance company out there that covers non-branded trailers pre 2012 legislation, that are well built, structurally sound, and comply with RSA regulations, but just werent constructed by a recognized manufacturer (williams etc)?

    If the small print on a policy enables an insurance underwriter to deem your policy null and void, the courts are likely to have the insurance company pay out, but whats to stop the insurance company coming after you for the shirt on your back, even if you bought the policy in good faith?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,922 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Jayo2011 wrote: »
    But if an accident caused injury to a 3rd party, where the third party sustained serious injuries, and were awarded a significant claim (100k+) they would definitely do their best to recoup their losses if the law permitted them. This is the reason I raised this post. Is there an insurance company out there that covers non-branded trailers pre 2012 legislation, that are well built, structurally sound, and comply with RSA regulations, but just werent constructed by a recognized manufacturer (williams etc)?

    If the small print on a policy enables an insurance underwriter to deem your policy null and void, the courts are likely to have the insurance company pay out, but whats to stop the insurance company coming after you for the shirt on your back, even if you bought the policy in good faith?

    If they can't get homes off people not paying the mortgage tied to it then they will never get a home for an insurance company claim. They might be able to get a rental property or other assets but not a home with our current laws.


Advertisement