Accident in uninsured car

[lra]

This incident makes me think about the number of times I've driven somebody else's car with no thought about it being registered or insured, or even asking if it was.
Lessons are learned the hard way.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by lra

This incident makes me think about the number of times I've driven somebody else's car with no thought about it being registered or insured, or even asking if it was.
Lessons are learned the hard way.

Costs me $6700/year for the insurance to drive a customers vehicle of the value of up to $125,000 because me and the business partner are both under 25.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by ea90gl

Huge sigh..........

As usual the brain washed arm chair experts come out in full force and offer their opinions most likely based on not much at all.

I am currently helping out a relative of mine who is in a very similar situation, he is currently uninsured and was involved in an accident where he rear ended an average condition 2006 Holden Barina. The Barina was deemed a write off and the insurance company began their chase for amounts owing etc.

I said to my relative you have obviously made a stupid mistake and will have to pay a certain amount regardless of what the outcome is.

The insurance company representing the owner of the damaged Barina were seeking just under $5000 to recoup all associated costs etc.

They sent out associated reports and also various advertisements of similar Barinas in mint condition with extremely low KM for sale by registered car dealers in order to justify the costs in which they were demanding.

Long story short after a quick 20 min email sent to the seeking insurance company questioning some things in regards to the matter, they ended up responding only seeking a total amount of $3800 this time around. $1200 less than the original requested amount.

The point is even though you are in the wrong and will ultimately have to pay for your silly actions, you still have the right to be not taken advantage of and if you feel this is the case question it and stand up for yourself.

Good luck and all the best

I feel sorry for the person your relative hit, they had a perfectly driving car that they were happy with and through no fault of their own some thoughtless and selfish person wrote their car off for them and then goes to argue about it

There is a lot more to having your car written off by someone than just the value of the car, what about the time and effort in finding a replacement?? What about possible loss of transport to work/School/Uni etc??

Now they have the inconvenience of no car, they have to chase around trying to find a replacement, wasting their time and week ends doing so, all because your selfish and inconsiderate relative could not be bothered doing the right thing by his fellow motorists. Not only that the poor person left without a car through no fault of their own are taking a gamble on the unknown by buying a replacement car for $3800 if they can find one, as they may be hit with a repair bill for thousands once issues with their new purchase crop up.

Hardly seems fair to me.

We had a Daihatsu Feroza worth nothing (we were given it for free) it was in perfect mechanical condition after I went through it, and drove me to work daily for close to 5 years, I had it third party property insured. I would have been very ****ed off of some selfish person wrote it off for me and then argued about me wanting fair and just compensation for my car.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Sorted

If you have your car insured and it is not with a DODGY cheap insurer like YOUI, AAMI, BUDGET DIRECT, COLES, BINGLE etc etc

You may have this extension on your insurance policy but that is ony if you have car insurance for your own car and it is not with a dodgy cheap insurer -

Substitute vehicle Insurance Cover EXTENSION

We cover your legal liability, up to the maximum policy limit of $30,000,000 to pay for accidental damage by a registered vehicle being used by you as a substitute vehicle while your vehicle is being serviced, repaired or is not driveable.
We give you this benefit only if:
• one substitute vehicle is being used at any one time in place of your vehicle,
• the substitute vehicle is not already covered under another insurance policy, and the substitute vehicle is not owned by you and you have the owner’s permission to drive it

I love how no one has made a comment about this - just goes to show no one reads the PDS and has no idea of this extra benefit and that in fact the OP did not even have his car insured.

Third Party Only Property Damage is only $160 and if your so tight that you risk driving un-insured then bad luck if you have an accident as your an idiot.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

This is an excellent point.

No it's not.

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Obviously the general consensus is insurance, at least 3rd party, is a must. But there will always be people who don't take out any insurance at all. Some just can't afford it, and I agree that if that's the case you can't really afford to own and drive a car.

Correct, no insurance should not be on the road IMO, I am really surprised that it is not against the law to drive a car that does not have at least third party property damage, but that is another topic all together.

Originally Posted by tranquilized

But then there are others who have no insurance for other reasons.

What reasons could this possibly be??

Originally Posted by tranquilized

That's their choice..

Correct again unfortunately, but then they need to be prepared to pay up when their choice turns to ****.

Originally Posted by tranquilized

if they're unlucky enough to cause an accident that doesn't give the victim, or their insurance company, the right to take them to the cleaners. They should have the opportunity to pay a fair and reasonable cost to make things right.

Well it sort of does, as the victim should be fairly compensated, they are put out enough as it is. They should have their car fixed to pre accident condition, they should have a loan car to drive while this is being done. And if the car is written off they should be duly compensated for their loss, including travel to from work/shopping/uni/school etc paid for till they can find a suitable replacement.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Sorted

I love how no one has made a comment about this - just goes to show no one reads the PDS and has no idea of this extra benefit and that in fact the OP did not even have his car insured.

I am confused by your comment. How do you know the OP's own car is not insured??

The OP was not driving his car when involved in the accident, he was driving someone else's car.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I am confused by your comment. How do you know the OP's own car is not insured??
.

Well he has not commented and said anything to think otherwise.

I would have thought at least a thanks for the information but my current car insurance does not have this extra benefit or something like that since we are all trying to help him.

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

The OP was not driving his car when involved in the accident, he was driving someone else's car.

Yes I am aware of this thus the Substitute vehicle Insurance Cover EXTENSION clause which I mentioned.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Sorted

If you have your car insured and it is not with a DODGY cheap insurer like YOUI, AAMI, BUDGET DIRECT, COLES, BINGLE etc etc

You may have this extension on your insurance policy but that is ony if you have car insurance for your own car and it is not with a dodgy cheap insurer -

Substitute vehicle Insurance Cover EXTENSION

We cover your legal liability, up to the maximum policy limit of $30,000,000 to pay for accidental damage by a registered vehicle being used by you as a substitute vehicle while your vehicle is being serviced, repaired or is not driveable.
We give you this benefit only if:
• one substitute vehicle is being used at any one time in place of your vehicle,
• the substitute vehicle is not already covered under another insurance policy, and the substitute vehicle is not owned by you and you have the owner’s permission to drive it

Great paint and may be an avenue for the OP.

I for one never knew this existed, will check my policy, my F6 is currently with NRMA.

Not that it's an huge issue , I cant remember the last time I drove someone else's car...

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Great paint and may be an avenue for the OP.

I for one never knew this existed, will check my policy, my F6 is currently with NRMA.

Not that it's an huge issue , I cant remember the last time I drove someone else's car...

Yes NRMA also have this benefit - the others I mentioned may have the cover but I doubt it as they are known to have a cheap policy and with insurance you pay for what you get

Includes:- •if you borrow a substitute vehicle while your vehicle is being repaired,
serviced or has broken down, then we also provide liability cover for any
loss or damage caused by the use of the substitute vehicle.

excludes:- • loss or damage caused by the use of a "hire car" as a substitute vehicle

Applicable to this PDS though I am unsure how many different car insurance products NRMA have
Page 56 http://www.nrma.com.au/sites/nrma/fi...s_0616_all.pdf

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Well it sort of does, as the victim should be fairly compensated, they are put out enough as it is. They should have their car fixed to pre accident condition, they should have a loan car to drive while this is being done. And if the car is written off they should be duly compensated for their loss, including travel to from work/shopping/uni/school etc paid for till they can find a suitable replacement.

This.

I have no sympathy for an uninsured at fault party in an accident. They pay whatever it takes to get the not at fault party back to the position they would've been in if it wasn't for that accident. If they can't afford it, too bad, they have the option of declaring bankruptcy.

[riverrat321]

Thanks for the response everyone. It was a mates ute I borrowed. I was trying not to drive my own ute as someone verbally agreed to buy it and they were arranging finance and asked the exact Ks so I just didn't want to use it and put extra Ks on and complicate things. My mates car has a tiny dent in the bonnet

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

No it's not.

Yes it is.

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Correct, no insurance should not be on the road IMO, I am really surprised that it is not against the law to drive a car that does not have at least third party property damage, but that is another topic all together.

It is another topic but quickly, compulsory 3rd party insurance would be a good thing but only if it was the same kinda deal as the TAC charge, or 3rd party personal insurance, where the premium is included as part of your registration cost. It should never be legislated that everyone must by law be at the mercy of insurance companies and who they consider high risk. Although I'm sure the insurance industry has a lobby group pushing for exactly that.

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

What reasons could this possibly be??

Some may take a calculated risk and decide that paying a huge premium is not worth it for them once the km's and location of those km's driven is taken into consideration. You won't agree with it, but it isn't against the law.

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Correct again unfortunately, but then they need to be prepared to pay up when their choice turns to ****.

Absolutely, agree 100%

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Well it sort of does, as the victim should be fairly compensated, they are put out enough as it is. They should have their car fixed to pre accident condition, they should have a loan car to drive while this is being done. And if the car is written off they should be duly compensated for their loss, including travel to from work/shopping/uni/school etc paid for till they can find a suitable replacement.

No it doesn't. My definition of "taken to the cleaners" = being unfairly/deceptively charged. Like the example ea90gl provided where the insurance company wished to replace their customers beat up high km car with a mint condition low km example at the expense of the person who caused the crash. Why should they cop this? As you said, the victim should be fairly compensated, I agree. And this might mean paying for their hire car, if it's a classic or exotic it might mean paying top dollar for a high end panel shop. What it doesn't mean is putting the victim in a better and more expensive car, or providing them with a financial windfall.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I feel sorry for the person your relative hit, they had a perfectly driving car that they were happy with and through no fault of their own some thoughtless and selfish person wrote their car off for them and then goes to argue about it

There is a lot more to having your car written off by someone than just the value of the car, what about the time and effort in finding a replacement?? What about possible loss of transport to work/School/Uni etc??

Now they have the inconvenience of no car, they have to chase around trying to find a replacement, wasting their time and week ends doing so, all because your selfish and inconsiderate relative could not be bothered doing the right thing by his fellow motorists. Not only that the poor person left without a car through no fault of their own are taking a gamble on the unknown by buying a replacement car for $3800 if they can find one, as they may be hit with a repair bill for thousands once issues with their new purchase crop up.

Hardly seems fair to me.

We had a Daihatsu Feroza worth nothing (we were given it for free) it was in perfect mechanical condition after I went through it, and drove me to work daily for close to 5 years, I had it third party property insured. I would have been very ****ed off of some selfish person wrote it off for me and then argued about me wanting fair and just compensation for my car.

Car was written off & market value obviously paid out as mentioned by ea90gl in his post instead of a mark up value by insurance company.

As for your comment of having to go without a car & the inconveniance of finding another car is irrelevent if the person was insured or not.

[PG2]

Originally Posted by riverrat321

Thanks for the response everyone. It was a mates ute I borrowed. I was trying not to drive my own ute as someone verbally agreed to buy it and they were arranging finance and asked the exact Ks so I just didn't want to use it and put extra Ks on and complicate things. My mates car has a tiny dent in the bonnet

Have you been told the final figure yet?

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

What it doesn't mean is putting the victim in a better and more expensive car, or providing them with a financial windfall.

It is unlikely that there are any winners, and in most cases even with full insurance most people involved in crashes would be VERY lucky to break even or end up with a similar car to what they had.

Considering out of pocket expenses such as registration and stamp duty on replacement car, new insurance policy on replacement car, time and money spend on locating a suitable replacement car, possible repairs to replacement cars, new tires, suspension work, exhaust, engine, trans etc etc as possible expenses, travel to work while they don't have a car and the list goes on.

Who is to say that the in your opinion high km car has been maintained with no expenses spared by the owner, it might have had a new motor/trans/tires etc fitted only a short time ago at great expense to the owner who intended to keep his 'cheap' car on the road for a few more years.

Like I said there is a LOT more to compensating the owner than just saying your car was worth $3800 and that's the end of it.

In most cases there are no winners, that's why most people with an ounce of common sense have insurance.

By the way none of this is aimed at the OP who obviously got 'caught out' in a bad situation, and appears to be doing the right thing to rectify his mistake (which really was his mates mistake when all is said and done), it's more aimed at people who knowingly drive without insurance, and then sit there shrugging their shoulders complaining about the expense of compensating the victim of their actions.

I remember years ago my dad's brand new Magna being rear ended by some bloke without insurance who then proceeded to complain at the expense of repairing the car which was only about 4 weeks old and my dad's first brand new car

Lucky for full comprehensive insurance, I won't leave home without it these days...

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by trublu

Car was written off & market value obviously paid out as mentioned by ea90gl in his post instead of a mark up value by insurance company.

As for your comment of having to go without a car & the inconveniance of finding another car is irrelevent if the person was insured or not.

Pretty sure it's not irrelevant to the owner of the car that is written off and who is now out of pocket.

Plus a lot of policies will cover you for a hire car, I recently had a hire car for 6 or 7 weeks while repairs to my vehicle were completed at no expense to me. And guess what the whole hire car bill was back charged to the perpetrator of the damage, as well as the excess of the police and any other related expenses

[jpblue1000]

My cars are all agreed value with my insurer. And all values are above market, in some cases well above market a they are modified. A total loss will be paid out to me, in a similar scenario to the OP irrespective of the opinion of the other at fault driver, I will receive my money. The insurance company will then seek damage from the at fault party. My insurance companies 'loss' will b substantially greater than the market value of the car. I've had a hire car cost surpass the accident damage as the panel shop awaited parts to come in from OS for a new car hit while parked. Then there is the insurance companies administration costs, towing, storage etc..
Once insurance is involved your no longer dealing with pure repair costs, and usually their lawyers are going to be able to work harder than yours!
JP

[ea90gl]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I feel sorry for the person your relative hit, they had a perfectly driving car that they were happy with and through no fault of their own some thoughtless and selfish person wrote their car off for them and then goes to argue about it

There is a lot more to having your car written off by someone than just the value of the car, what about the time and effort in finding a replacement?? What about possible loss of transport to work/School/Uni etc??

Now they have the inconvenience of no car, they have to chase around trying to find a replacement, wasting their time and week ends doing so, all because your selfish and inconsiderate relative could not be bothered doing the right thing by his fellow motorists. Not only that the poor person left without a car through no fault of their own are taking a gamble on the unknown by buying a replacement car for $3800 if they can find one, as they may be hit with a repair bill for thousands once issues with their new purchase crop up.

Hardly seems fair to me.

We had a Daihatsu Feroza worth nothing (we were given it for free) it was in perfect mechanical condition after I went through it, and drove me to work daily for close to 5 years, I had it third party property insured. I would have been very ****ed off of some selfish person wrote it off for me and then argued about me wanting fair and just compensation for my car.

That's a very heart breaking story you have there. I'm not sure what the difference would be if my relative was completely insured? The poor owner of the other vehicle would still have to go through all that hassle regardless.....

Your not understanding the situation and are trying to make it seem like the owner of the other vehicle is fighting for their life and is left out of pocket due to my relative being not insured. In reality what actually happens is the insurance company compensates and sorts out the victims situation without hassle (that's exactly why us smarter people have insurance in the first place). They then chase the uninsured up to be reimbursed for whatever amount they see fit.

What happens next is anyone's guess and can be very questionable. How do we know the insurance company just settled the case with a $2500 payout yet are seeking $5000? They rely on people like you to bend over and say yep I will pay the total amount because society told me to do so and If I question anything I will be in fear of being an outcast and not be socially accepted. If the insurance company can justify their requested costs then so be it, pay the full final amount and be done with it. If the insurance company can justify their requested costs and you still want to argue about it then by all means a smack on the head is well deserved.

Although different, the principles are the same - if I issue a plain jane invoice to customer for $10g worth of work upon completion of the job they have every right to request a more broken down itemised invoice which I would be more than happy to provide to them. Once they can see everything is legitimate and fair everyone is happy and everything gets sorted out. How would they know that I would be happy to take $8g to cover both labour and materials and try chuck in an extra $2g to cover that big screen TV my wife is bugging me to get?

Also the amount of stories I have heard in regards to insurance companies trying to get out payments and also only offering measly pay out sums makes me have no problem with putting forward queries to them in any situation regardless of who is at fault in any situation

[Qwerty321]

Correct me if I'm wrong, by if the party who's been hit has Full Comprehensive Cover, it doesn't actually make a difference to them if the other party is insured or not right?

Cause I'm fairly certain that in my policy (I've got Full Comprehensive because my premium as a teenage guy is so high there isn't much difference between third and comprehensive) it says if I get hit by an uninsured driver, then I'll still get full payout and whatever by my insurance policy, and my insurer will then go about chasing up the other party through the courts or whatever. But to me as a driver, it doesn't matter if the other party is insured or not.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Unfortunately (fortunately for those that have insurance) it is not so, it's up to the owner of the damaged car where they want to take it.

They did nothing wrong and everything right why should they be put out and possibly have sub standard repairs done to their car??

I remember some uninsured bloke running up the back of my freshly and professionally painted (reputable panel shop) GT Cortina years ago while I was stopped at a set of lights, the paint had hardly dried, and he wanted me to take the car to his mate who repaired cars in his back yard to get the repairs done I had full insurance so guess where my car went?? Not the blokes mates back yard thats for sure, insurance company ended up taking the uninsured driver to Court.

I ended up taking a cash pay out for damage and organising my own repairs.

I fell for this one years ago,

I was stopped in traffic in my then 2 year old BA Fairmont Ghia, and a VERY nice looking young lady ran up my clacker, the damage didn't look bad she put on the water works, and said her dads friend owns a panel shop near where I lived can i take it there and her dad will pay for the repairs.

The panel shop in question is reasonably well known as a quality place so I figured what harm could it be

The car was repaired and I went on my way

until I had a flat tyre 12 months later and I couldn't get the spare out as the boot floor was pushed up in to the tyre

I took it back to said shop who told me any number of rear enders could have happened since they repaired it and told me to **** off.

it was a company car and it was due to be replaced so I just a my territory and moved on with life, but I learnt never to fall for the trap again it doesn't matter how much the pretty young brunette tears up

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by Qwerty321

Correct me if I'm wrong, by if the party who's been hit has Full Comprehensive Cover, it doesn't actually make a difference to them if the other party is insured or not right?

Cause I'm fairly certain that in my policy (I've got Full Comprehensive because my premium as a teenage guy is so high there isn't much difference between third and comprehensive) it says if I get hit by an uninsured driver, then I'll still get full payout and whatever by my insurance policy, and my insurer will then go about chasing up the other party through the courts or whatever. But to me as a driver, it doesn't matter if the other party is insured or not.

Thats correct and usually if you can name the other driver it wont affect you premium / excess wise.

So (as per my post above) I don't give a stuff if the person who hits me is insured or not I'll just lodge a claim and let the insurer handle it

The OP accepts he did wrong and accepts he's got to pay as a result so I wont **** can him.

I hope the bill isn't too bad for the poor bugger and I'll be he wont make that mistake again

[Big_Daz]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Have you checked out websites like itwasntmyfault.com.au or similar. I have not used them but apparently if you are not at fault in an accident and do not have hire car option on your insurance, this company gives you a loan car as close as possible to your current car and then they go after the other party for the fees.
Insurance companies will give you the cheapest small car they can get from a regular rental agancy, apparently with these independent companies if you own a luxury SUV, they will try to get you a luxury SUV as your loan car.
Sounds too good to be true, but if it's no money out of your pocket it's worth a shot.

Yeah mate, that's who my hire car is through. They will only give it for free if the at fault party lodges a claim... As soon as they found out he had no insurance they wanted to take it back (they give it to you for 7 days regardless) The smash repairer helped to work out a deal where I private hire the car for $33 a day (which isn't too bad considering its a Rav 4)

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Qwerty321

Correct me if I'm wrong, by if the party who's been hit has Full Comprehensive Cover, it doesn't actually make a difference to them if the other party is insured or not right?

Cause I'm fairly certain that in my policy (I've got Full Comprehensive because my premium as a teenage guy is so high there isn't much difference between third and comprehensive) it says if I get hit by an uninsured driver, then I'll still get full payout and whatever by my insurance policy, and my insurer will then go about chasing up the other party through the courts or whatever. But to me as a driver, it doesn't matter if the other party is insured or not.

Correct.

This is why I have full insurance, I could not really care less if the person who hits me has no insurance as my car gets fixed and they will be dragged through the Courts or what ever, not my problem.

It's only a problem if you only have third party property yourself (which I have had in the past with cheap cars), and the other person has no insurance.

[riverrat321]

Thanks again guys. Still no info yet but I hope I find out the amount payable soon cos I'm stressing. My Mate was only helping me out. Never considered asking about insurance at all so yeah I won't make this mistake again.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by riverrat321

Thanks again guys. Still no info yet but I hope I find out the amount payable soon cos I'm stressing. My Mate was only helping me out. Never considered asking about insurance at all so yeah I won't make this mistake again.

Don't stress too much, even if it's a rediculous figure you end up having to pay back they all allow time payments, and as long as you're honest and up front with them won't have you paying back heaps each week.

They're not stupid, a little each week is better than you going bankrupt and them getting nothing at all.