Stolen car caused accident

[singlechic]

Hello, i will keep this as short as possible, last year my son had an accident, when another car ploughed in to the side of his companies van, there where 3 witnesses to it , the driver of other car got out and run off, the police where called and they couldnt find the other driver, then we found out the car was stolen, none of the witnesses really got a good look at the other driver .Police contacted my son told him they had a suspect and they had sent the case on to the CPS to see if there was enough evidence to charge the suspect ,son got phone call to-day from the officer dealing with the case and he told him the case had been turned down by the CPS and there was nothing more that could be done, and they where dropping the case. My son was hurt in the accident can my son still lodge a claim as he was of sick for 2 weeks due to the accident

Thx

[Rooster-UK]

Hi Singlechick.

 

I think that there is an organisation that deals with this type of situation. I'm not certain. Something that "rings a bell" in the back of my mind.

I'm sure that someone in the know will be able to clarify the position.

Just keep an eye on your thread.

 

Regards, Rooster.

[rory32]

My son was hurt in the accident can my son still lodge a claim as he was of sick for 2 weeks due to the accident

As the driver is technically untraced as there is not enough evidence to charge the suspect any claim would have to be done through the Motor Insurers Bureau.

 

Accident claims

[INSURANCEGUY]

Rory is right,

 

even under the RTA (road traffic act) any claimant would need to provide fellon details (details of the thief), as this cant be done, because no felon has been found guilty, no insurer will deal.

 

Therefore it is left to the MIB.

 

I would approach a solicitor and get them to do the work for you, MIB Claims can be long and hard work!

 

good luck

[silent night]

Hi everybody, I am new to this forum. Singlechic, I am sorry to hear of your plight. My daughters car was stolen over Xmas and involved in a similar accident. No one was arrested at the scene and her car was driven away and recovered a few days later. Her insurance company have said that they have to pay for the damage because it was her car involved even though it was reported stolen. Is this correct? It seem weird because I am sure they would not pay out if one of her friends or me had been driving it so why a thief. I don't mean to be insensitive to Singlechic but this is the other side of these stories.

Keep up the good work

 

Kathryn

[JonCris]

Because if they don't pay who do you think should. Your insurance as a minimum will almost certainly include Fire & THEFT. Also why should the entirely innocent victim pay they are even less liable than your daughter

[merlin100]

The daughter is just as innocent as the "innocent victim". And why should her insurance pay up? SHE is insured to drive a SPECIFIC vehicle - determined by make, model and reg NO.

If someone else is driving that car without her consent or knowledge, then she should not be liable.

We are back to the usual insurance cop-out - Lets throw some money at it and it will go away.

Two years ago I was driving my car within the speed limit, taxed, tested and insured, perfectly roadworthy etc, when this idiot on a pushbike decided to pull away from the kerb without any warning and ended up under my car. He was very badly hurt.

I had a nightmare fighting the claim off - the police were all too ready for me to accept blame simply so he could claim. My insurance company were all too willing to pay up. thereby forcing me to lose 65% no-claims bonus.

So why should I pay because some idiot on a bike makes a bad call?

I got out of it in the end by threatening the insurance company with harrassment and false accusations, for which I was prepared to take them to court. Their actions would have cost me monetarily.

Keep fighting it - you did nothing wrong. Let them know that you wont be one of the many that simply roll over because it seems to be the easy option

[patdavies]

Because if they don't pay who do you think should. Your insurance as a minimum will almost certainly include Fire & THEFT. Also why should the entirely innocent victim pay they are even less liable than your daughter

A stolen car is by definition uninsured (not even DOC as the owner's consent has not been obtained).

 

In England, the legal requirement is that the driver is insured, not the vehicle.

 

The daughter's insurers are not liable, the innocent party will need to claim against the Motor Insurers Bureau

 

The theft cover on the daughter's policy (if she has TPFT or Fully Comp) is designed to reimburse her for the loss (theft) of the car; not to provide insurance cover for the thief

[JonCris]

As I recall you can only claim through the MIB for personal injury not material damage.

 

Also the owners insurer IS the insurer of last resort & even though stolen the car was and is insured it is hence the OP's daughter's insurer will pay

 

It's unfortunate but someone has to compensate the victim & this case the daughter's insurer is in the frame............had she not been insured & despite it's apparent unfairness she could have been sued by the owner of the damaged car

 

I realize the daughter is innocent but then so is the other owner more so & why should the latter suffer a loss because someone stole another's car........it's the lesser of 2 evils I'm afraid

[JonCris]

TP is just that 3rd Party & that's that............ It would even apply if the driver was unlicensed in that the insurance would still be valid if they struck another.........the difference is they, the uninsured driver, would not be compensated just the TP

 

Also why is the daughter's insurer going to pay if they ain't liable........goodness of their heart...........I very much doubt it............ they are paying ........cos they is liable..simple as that

[WelshMam2009]

It's compulsory to have third party liability as I understand it.

[JonCris]

Quite & it applies no matter who is driving, unlicensed driver OR car thief

[WelshMam2009]

Quite & it applies no matter who is driving, unlicensed driver OR car thief

 

Agreed!!

[JonCris]

Incidentally even if the victim did apply to the MIB they would simply pass it back to the daughters insurer because as I have stated they are the insurer of last resort rather than the MIB

[singlechic]

Hi every-one... just a quick Question, my son got a letter from the solicitor thats dealing with his case, and has asked him to make an appointment to come in and see him, apperantly he has got the police report back and he wants to discuss it with him, but the only appointment he can get is 2 weeks away, as the solicitor is away on holidays, would any one know if this is routine , my son is the sort of person that would continuiously worry about it. It was him ask me to get in contact with yous.

Any help would be great Thx

[WelshMam2009]

Hi every-one... just a quick Question, my son got a letter from the solicitor thats dealing with his case, and has asked him to make an appointment to come in and see him, apperantly he has got the police report back and he wants to discuss it with him, but the only appointment he can get is 2 weeks away, as the solicitor is away on holidays, would any one know if this is routine , my son is the sort of person that would continuiously worry about it. It was him ask me to get in contact with yous.

Any help would be great Thx

 

Tell your son to relax...it will probably be something rather mundane and the solicitor simply wants clarification on some points. If it was that important the solicitor would have arranged an appointment before he went away and/or asked a colleague to deal with the matter in his absence.

 

On a related topic, it is worth bearing in mind is that the burden of proof for a criminal conviction, "beyond reasonable doubt" is significantly greater than that of the "balance of probability" needed in civil cases.

 

So, whilst the suspect may have escaped a criminal prosecution, there may be sufficient grounds to bring a civil case...although, if the person concerned has little or no assets, then there is little to be gained in pursuing this.

[flyingdr]

As I recall you can only claim through the MIB for personal injury not material damage.

 

 

Hi JonCris

 

A bit late to post but I was trawling through the various posts.

 

You may know by now but you can claim for material damage and loss of property under the 2003 untraced drivers agreement with the MIB. There is a £300 reduction (a form of excess) for any claim for loss or damage to property.

 

I have a claim with the MIB for both property and injury.

 

Nearly five years now,!!