Jump to content

Just Imagine


Lonan3

Recommended Posts

Then contact one of them with your information.

 

No need. One has already contacted me.

 

Bloody hell That's amazing.

You couldn't make it up if you tried

 

 

Sure where do you think they get their stories from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the driver had been involved in an accident and the insurers, quite rightly, refused to pay up, who would have been responsible?

 

This seems to be the main question. My guess is the hypothetical victim of the hypthothetical accident should seek damages from the hypothetical driver personally, but certainly the best thing would be to get proper advice from a real lawyer. They might also advise if a claim might be made against the RTLC for vicarious liability or the like if, for example hypothetically, the victim was in the cab believing it to be properly regulated and the RTLC can be shown to have fallen short of a duty of care to passengers. That would probably be a lot harder and a lot more expensive, and it might be a lot easier if the hypothetical driver has sufficient assets and could be made to pay up the full amount. If the real lawyer says that there is nothing whatsover that can be done, then maybe the hypothetical victim should bring up the matter with his MHK - hypothetical or otherwise. I'm sure someone could recommend a good lawyer to help you with this hypothetical case - I'd think you'd get more mileage from this approach than you would from one of the local journos. (Personlly I'd also be inclined to speak to the laywer first).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to talk hypothetically at all.

Don't understand why a friend of mine took her test again and passed after the fourth attempt. Went for insurance and was asked if there were any 'incidents' or endorsements in the last five years. Answered "No", as she was banned for five years her answer was honest, the company insured her as a new driver, not as a drunk driver after a five year ban. This can't be right!

Does anyone agree that she should be classed as a newbie? Would the insurance be valid as she didn't lie, technically?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

small print does not work in driver's favour with insurance. You have a duty to tell them everything that might affect the premium, whether or not they frame the right question. Otherwise they will refuse to pay out when a big claim comes in and you have wasted your premiums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to talk hypothetically at all.

Don't understand why a friend of mine took her test again and passed after the fourth attempt. Went for insurance and was asked if there were any 'incidents' or endorsements in the last five years. Answered "No", as she was banned for five years her answer was honest, the company insured her as a new driver, not as a drunk driver after a five year ban. This can't be right!

Does anyone agree that she should be classed as a newbie? Would the insurance be valid as she didn't lie, technically?

 

In the UK endorsements for drink driving stay on a licence for 11years -- I thought it was the same here. If this is so your friend has lied and any insurance would cerainly be invalid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...