Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A red Mercedes S class smashed into our parked car a couple of weeks ago, causing ?1000's of damage. As we did not get a number plate, neither our insurance nor the MIB will investigate further. As it was a damage only accident, the police are not looking into it either.


Then last Thursday our car was hit again, causing a great deal more damage. This time we got the number plate and found, to our relief, that he was fully insured and admits all culpability. However, as he unfortunately had a stroke at the wheel causing the accident, the insurers say that he was not driving negligently, so they will not cover the damage.


Can this be so? Can anyone give us advice?

Unfortunately, and unfairly, I think the other party's insurers are within their rights, a stroke coming under "Act of God" and involving no negligence (unless the driver had a pre-existing condition which should have prevented him driving). A friend once had a lady who had an epileptic seizure crash through his garden wall: her insurers refused to pay as it was her first episode and so was in no way foreseeable or negligent. In that case the lady herself nobly stumped up for the repairs, but she was under no obligation to do so. I thought (could well be wrong) that insurers had an informal agreement to settle each other's claims in this sort of case...if you're fully comped your insurers will pay for repairs, but if I'm right and they can't get it back from the other party's insurer that'll be your no-claims gone for a burton and higher premiums on renewal.


As I said, it really doesn't seem fair but that's how I understand the position.

There are lawyers who will take on the MIB for the original damage on a no-win-no-fee basis - they take a hefty chunk (25%) if you win but still, 75% of your damages at no risk, worth a go? Good luck, feel for you.


ETA The MIB say on their website that they are there to compensate for untraceable culprits, so worth badgering - assume like most similar agencies their default response is to say no and see if you give up!

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A friend once had a lady who had an epileptic seizure crash through his garden wall:

> her insurers refused to pay as it was her first episode and so was in no way foreseeable or

> negligent. In that case the lady herself nobly stumped up for the repairs, but she was under no

> obligation to do so.


You may be right about the insurers liability, RH, but does that actually mean the driver themselves are not responsible for the damage? Might it be worth considering suing the driver?

Don't know about that, the insurer's stance would be that the driver is not at fault as there is no negligence on his/her part, if that applies to insurance one assumes it applies in any other related legal proceeding. Not at all sure though!

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/mar/12/driver-heart-attack-wrote-off-my-parked-car-lost-no-claims


Well, that answers my question, but I have to say, it's definitely a case of "the law is an ass".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The step means Love Dulwich is not disabled friendly though they went to help someone on  crutches up the step last time we were there  much prefer it as a Turkish than café but maybe not for this group   The noise level might be an issue as it’s all hard surfaces though I don’t recall it being noisy. check out Olivelli the menu has a good range  though it’s not the best Italian you can get. There’s also a step up into Maria’s - much smaller but you need to negotiate the step and door at the same time. Olivelli has more room and if I remember right the toilets are on the ground floor. A consideration if steps are an issue The Lordship might be an option. Noise is not usually an issue. We’ve enjoyed various meals there. The ladies toilets are on the same floor as the tables (the gents may be upstairs). The staff are always friendly
    • It’s about chains, and the ethos of family run business versus unhealthy competition 
    • 'Tom Lehrer, acclaimed musical satirist of cold war era, dies aged 97' https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/jul/28/tom-lehrer-dies-aged-97-dead-musical-satirist  
    • But all those examples sell a wide variety of things,  and mostly they are well spread out along Lordship Lane. These two shops both sell one very specific thing, albeit in different flavours, and are just across the road from each other. I don't think you can compare the distribution of shops in Roman times to the distribution of shops in Lordship Lane in the twenty first century. Well, you can, but it doesn't feel very appropriate. Haa anybody asked the first shop how they feel? Are they happy about the "healthy competition" ?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...