unforceen accidents

[spenttoomuchagain]

Until recently i thought all accidents were unforceen, or else we would not have them.

I was unlucky enough to be involved in a car crash. The other person had a heart attack at the wheel and drove into the back of my car. Unfortunatly the driver died at the sceen.

When putting in my claim to the insurance company i was told that as it was an unforceen accident that no body was liable and that i would have to claim from my own insurance loosing my no claims bonus.

I understand that i was the lucky one in this accident as i walked away un hurt physically, but finacially i have lost big time.

The other driver was fully insured and up to date with his premiums, but this is a get out clause that the insurance company uses to not pay up.

I am told that the accident was an act of god and could not be forceen so no one is responsible.

Luckily i had fully comp insurance which did cover some of my costs, but here is a warning to drivers on 3rd party ins, you may have an accident that is not your fault and have your car written off and not be able to make a claim on the other sides insurance.

If i had been hit by an uninsured driver then there are companys i could have claimed from. But as the driver was insured at the time of the accident there was nothing i could do.

just thought i would pre warn others who may find themselves in the same situation.

[joneshousehold]

Have you checked your policy and does it match up to what is being said. If yours doesn't then why should you believe the other person's does? Can you not get access to a copy of the other driver's policy to prove what they are saying.

 

If you tell your insurance that you do not accept this do they have to pursue your claim on your behalf? Can you get any independant legal advice such as via a union or trade organisation?

 

I'm not saying any of this is right, these are just the kind of thoughts that are going through my head when I read your post. Interesting point though!

[JonCris]

HI Spent

As in all claims, negligence or another tort needs to be established. If the insurer that refuses to pay has evidence of no prior knowledge of a heart problem then the defence is valid.

They would have to produce the deceaseds medical records for scrutiny & if there is any evidence or even suspicion of heart problems then they are liable

It will be difficult for them to prove the Act of GOD defence without proper evidence of a sudden attack to their Insured, who is no longer there to defend himself. Innocent victims are likely to receive some sympathy and have the upper hand in litigation in these sort of circumstances.

Make a claim via the MIB (Motor Insurance Burea) & they will probably tell the deceased's insurer to deal with it

[spenttoomuchagain]

I have contacted various legal advisors who tell me this is correct,

The only way i could have gone was to sue the driver through the courts, but i was told that with any case like this it would be very unusual for a judge to be on my side.

To be honest this happened a while ago and the claim and repairs have all been finalised.

I am not realy asking for help with this but as I have just found the cag which is helping me through getting a refund of my bank charges.I thought this info might be of help to others.

Thanks for your thoughts on this matter.

[JonCris]

spent then you have been badly advised.

 

Contrary to what you have been told Judges don't like the Act of God argument & WILL mostly side with the victim. The IC's used to use that argument to deny liabilty for things such as storm damage but the courts eventualy put a stop to that.

 

In addition your claim should have been directed to the MIB which would have 1st adjudicated on liabilty & if you where not advised to do this at the outset you where badly advised.

 

I'm curious when you say legal advisors whom do you mean the guy in the pub or qualified solicitors?