Many of these EU rules are just implemented via a statutory instrument, not an actual bill of Parliament. Bur i don't know which SI is relevant.

 

The person who posted the EU rules deals with the legal side of things and would probably know more about it in terms of current usage,

 

If you think about it, there is a logic to it. Say you had an accident, where the third party was at fault. The third party died a week later due to something unrelated or they left the UK. You were therefore denied the opportunity in suing the third party, but the third party Insurers were still the Insurers under RTA law. The third party Insurers would be the party responsible for dealing with the liability for the accident.

Yes I guess there is some logic to it as the Insurance company would remain liable for the risk even if it were to the estate of the diseased person even if the insurance policy expired or was cancelled after the accident.

I guess the best way to cover all eventualities would be to sue "joint and several" which means that all named parties would be liable for the whole of the claim, it only being shared if both parties are able to share the liability and pay. It's a nice catch-all.

Many of these EU rules are just implemented via a statutory instrument, not an actual bill of Parliament. Bur i don't know which SI is relevant.

 

The person who posted the EU rules deals with the legal side of things and would probably know more about it in terms of current usage,

 

If you think about it, there is a logic to it. Say you had an accident, where the third party was at fault. The third party died a week later due to something unrelated or they left the UK. You were therefore denied the opportunity in suing the third party, but the third party Insurers were still the Insurers under RTA law. The third party Insurers would be the party responsible for dealing with the liability for the accident.

The main reason the EU brought it in was to make claiming against foreign registered car / foreign Insurer easier.

As with most of the EU rules, they're to simplify cross border trade.

It's also to make it easier for an innocent party to recover money for instance if the third party driver is untraceable or non responsive, it allows you to go directly against the Insurer.

It also ties in with the MID database as it's now very easy to trace the Insurer of a vehicle even cross border

The main reason the EU brought it in was to make claiming against foreign registered car / foreign Insurer easier.

 

As with most of the EU rules, they're to simplify cross border trade.

 

It's also to make it easier for an innocent party to recover money for instance if the third party driver is untraceable or non responsive, it allows you to go directly against the Insurer.

 

It also ties in with the MID database as it's now very easy to trace the Insurer of a vehicle even cross border

This isn't really a political discussion but "as with most of the EU rules, they're to simplify cross border trade". Really? 126 pages of regulations to sell cabages. Simplify???

Suing a foreign driver in a foreign registered vehicle insured by a foreign insurance company is likely to be something of an up-hill struggle. Of course, if the situation were reversed, anyone elsewhere in the EU suing a UK driver/insurance company would be given all possible assistance by authorities in the UK. Given other countries' propensity for adhering only to EU rules they like, I would not be confident of assistance in the other direction.

I'm not sure if "joint and several" for co-defendants is available elsewhere in the EU but it is still the way to go in the UK.

This isn't really a political discussion but "as with most of the EU rules, they're to simplify cross border trade". Really? 126 pages of regulations to sell cabages. Simplify???

 

Suing a foreign driver in a foreign registered vehicle insured by a foreign insurance company is likely to be something of an up-hill struggle. Of course, if the situation were reversed, anyone elsewhere in the EU suing a UK driver/insurance company would be given all possible assistance by authorities in the UK. Given other countries' propensity for adhering only to EU rules they like, I would not be confident of assistance in the other direction.

 

I'm not sure if "joint and several" for co-defendants is available elsewhere in the EU but it is still the way to go in the UK.

Well said!

This isn't really a political discussion but "as with most of the EU rules, they're to simplify cross border trade". Really? 126 pages of regulations to sell cabages. Simplify???

 

Suing a foreign driver in a foreign registered vehicle insured by a foreign insurance company is likely to be something of an up-hill struggle. Of course, if the situation were reversed, anyone elsewhere in the EU suing a UK driver/insurance company would be given all possible assistance by authorities in the UK. Given other countries' propensity for adhering only to EU rules they like, I would not be confident of assistance in the other direction.

 

I'm not sure if "joint and several" for co-defendants is available elsewhere in the EU but it is still the way to go in the UK.

Considering being able to sue the Insurer rather than the driver was brought in by the EU, it is available for a UK driver to sue an Insurer in another EU country.

Considering being able to sue the Insurer rather than the driver was brought in by the EU, it is available for a UK driver to sue an Insurer in another EU country.

Your fault for mentioning the EU.

Straight bananas apparently

I had an accident on 1st October last year - completely and without question the other driver's fault, admitted by them and by their insurer. I went through my own insurance company mainly because I felt obliged to inform them and they just dealt with it all for me. I did receive correspondence from the at fault driver's insurer after I'd set this in motion offering to deal with it all and if they'd reacted a bit sooner I might well have chosen this route. However, my car was repaired, I had a replacement vehicle while it was off the road and the instructions to the repair shop from my insurer were that no excess was payable by me so all appeared seamless and I was delighted with the service. Fast forward a few months and I'm involved (through my insurer) in taking the other party to court because their insurer just won't pay up. They aren't questioning liability or the costs - they just won't pay. I feel sorry for the other driver. She's going to get the court claim documents in the next few days (in her name only) and I'd imagine she too thought this was done and dusted.

I had an accident on 1st October last year - completely and without question the other driver's fault, admitted by them and by their insurer. I went through my own insurance company mainly because I felt obliged to inform them and they just dealt with it all for me. I did receive correspondence from the at fault driver's insurer after I'd set this in motion offering to deal with it all and if they'd reacted a bit sooner I might well have chosen this route. However, my car was repaired, I had a replacement vehicle while it was off the road and the instructions to the repair shop from my insurer were that no excess was payable by me so all appeared seamless and I was delighted with the service. Fast forward a few months and I'm involved (through my insurer) in taking the other party to court because their insurer just won't pay up. They aren't questioning liability or the costs - they just won't pay. I feel sorry for the other driver. She's going to get the court claim documents in the next few days (in her name only) and I'd imagine she too thought this was done and dusted.

If they're not disputing liability or costs they will surely settle as soon as the court papers land on their desk.

Happened to me not so long ago.

It's probably a company with poor admin practices and your file is lying at the bottom of a pile somewhere.

It will be sorted when things get hot, don't worry.