Crashed into an ambulance

[Dieselman]

I don't and wasn't suggesting he was. I was disagreeing with your statement that an insurer has an obligation to honour a claim in any circumstance.

The law says they have an obligation to honour any 3rd party claim.
As far as honouring the insured parties claim, as long as the insured hasn't breached the contract, then they are obligated to pay, by law. It's a contract.

 

[Ierton]

That completely contradicts your previous post

 

[Dieselman]

That completely contradicts your previous post

How does it?

I see nothing in the original post that indicates the driver has breached the terms of the contract, do you?

The insurance company is obliged to pay, which is exactly what I said originally.

Just to be sure of my comment.

Of course the insurers will pay out, they have a legal obligation to and it's what he paid the premium to cover.

Their only get out will be if he has been found to be racing, but that's not what he's been charged with...he's been charged with "careless driving".

 

[Ierton]

Yes - the possibility of being charged with dangerous driving - an oft-cited clause in insurance of high risk cars.

 

[Dieselman]

Yes - the possibility of being charged with dangerous driving - an oft-cited clause in insurance of high risk cars.

He hasn't been charged with dangerous driving, but irrespective, that's not something that I've ever seen as a clause to invalidate insurance.

I've just read my own documents and "dangerous driving" isn't a restriction listed.

 

[Ierton]

Have you had many high-risk insurance policies before or worked in insurance? Irrespective you'd be aware of the many clauses underwriters have now included in the small-print. I've seen claims refused for far less - outside of a limited-mileage allowance or driving a modified car without notification for instance.

 

[Dieselman]

Was he driving a modified car?
Are there any specific exclusions in his policy?

As I said before, I've just read my policy to be sure of the exact wording.

 

[artyman]

My query about the £100K was not that a fully equipped ambulance wouldn't cost that but that a collision so shortly after takeoff is unlikely to result in a total of the ambulance, or as I said is there something else.

 

[Ierton]

From an Aon policy:

WHAT IS NOT INSURED

1. A Policy Claim where any of the following apply:
a) at the time of the Qualifying Accident the Insured Vehicle was being driven in circumstances constituting a criminal offence (whether or not prosecution ensued)

 

[Dieselman]

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Has the driver committed a criminal offence?

Yes or No would be the correct answer.

 

[Ierton]

Exactly - it's an unknown. Your blanket statement that the insurer would pay out for this accident irrespective of circumstances was incorrect.

 

[Dieselman]

Exactly - it's an unknown. Your blanket statement that the insurer would pay out for this accident irrespective of circumstances was incorrect.

It's not an unknown. He has been ticketed for careless driving, not robbing a bank.

 

[renault12ts]

Yeah but no but yeah but no but yeah but no but yeah but no but........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................yeah but no but yeah but no but yeah but no but...

 

[Dieselman]

^ LOL...

My point is that given the information we have the insurer is obliged to pay. Somehow we seem to have gone off into the realms of him now being an axe murderer...

 

[Gucci]

...if I could jump in at this point...

I can confirm, he hasn't (to my knowledge) murdered anyone with an axe. Don't know about any other weapon, but no axe, it's a bit "analogue" for him.



....sorry, please do carry on

 

[Ierton]

It's not an unknown. He has been ticketed for careless driving, not robbing a bank.

Right - which is a criminal offence - which means potentially his insurer may not pay out.

You like to back-peddle don't you?

 

[TDE1]

I'd suggest that the insurers will pay out regardless. The negative press that could arise from a repudiation would probably convince them. Imagine the headline..
"One less ambulance due to XXXX Insurance smallprint"

 

[Dieselman]

Right - which is a criminal offence - which means potentially his insurer may not pay out.

Careless driving is a Traffic offence, not a Criminal offence.

 

[MOCAŠ]

You like to back-peddle don't you?

Is that some kind of illegal sales activity?

 

[Spin_bowler]

I'd suggest that the insurers will pay out regardless. The negative press that could arise from a repudiation would probably convince them. Imagine the headline..
"One less ambulance due to XXXX Insurance smallprint"

They'll pay the third party regardless. I was suggesting the risk is with the insured. The ambulance will be covered.