# Hit by Uninsured Driver



## Christian6984

Hi, 

Im after some advice, earlier in the week i was hit by an uninsured (also untaxed) car. This has been reported to 101 as the details he gave me are as far as i can work out fake. 

I have purchased a new car so when i was dealing with the claims department of quotemehappy i asked when i add the claim to the policy, who do i put down as was to blame. They have said i will have to put 'driver at fault' i.e I am the one to blame. I disagree with this but would like to know should i stand for it or argue it with them. They have only has my description of the accident and haven't seen any of my pictures as evidence to assess either way. With the other car being uninsured i guess it will not be sent off for any assessment to come to this decision. Mine because of the extent of the damage has been written off because of the description i gave of the damage plus its 11 years old and high mileage. 

Thanks for any help in advance


----------



## Andyblue

Might / might not be helpful, but when my wife was run into the back of, when we looked at insurance following year - there was an option for uninsured driver hit you...

I would agree with you though, if they hit you, then I would not be accepting / agreeing to put down driver (you) at fault...


----------



## Christian6984

Thank you, will add some more info incase it helps. I want to remain unbiased to see an impartial opinion.

This is the location, a 90 degree blind bend.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.8...235.34425&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i13312!8i6656

I am heading towards Poulton and he was heading towards Singleton.
I am on the outside of the corner and he was on the inside or the corner.
the impact occurred right on the bend. 
The fiesta was hit behind the front wheel down the side and spun pushing the back wheels off the road.
The mazdas damage was front offside and stopped as if the car carried straight on (i.e on the wrong side of the road facing the direction of the farm track) He had unfortunately driven it onto the farm track by the time i got out of the car.

This was where the fiesta ended up.










The damage closer










The Mazda


----------



## Fentum

I wouldn't accept it as your fault. I think the cal centre person is just being lazy and doesn't want to do extra work.

BTW, did you get a picture of the other driver's face as well as the damage to the car? If he's given you false details, and isn't taxed, I'm pretty sure the police would be interested and I'd not be surprised if he were, ahem, "known to them", in the parlance.

Peter


----------



## Kash-Jnr

Its so easy to check AskMID for insurance and the Gov website for tax and MOT - why didn't you do this at the time?


----------



## Christian6984

Fentum said:


> I wouldn't accept it as your fault. I think the cal centre person is just being lazy and doesn't want to do extra work.
> 
> BTW, did you get a picture of the other driver's face as well as the damage to the car? If he's given you false details, and isn't taxed, I'm pretty sure the police would be interested and I'd not be surprised if he were, ahem, "known to them", in the parlance.
> 
> Peter


Rang 101 they are aware of it but said its a matter for my insurance. I dont have a picture of his face unfortunately



Kash-Jnr said:


> Its so easy to check AskMID for insurance and the Gov website for tax and MOT - why didn't you do this at the time?


Wasnt really thinking straight at the time. Out of curiosity if i did have this information at the time how would it benefit me with him being uninsured?


----------



## Kash-Jnr

Christian6984 said:


> Wasnt really thinking straight at the time. Out of curiosity if i did have this information at the time how would it benefit me with him being uninsured?


I would have called the Police - at least then I would have a crime reference number for the claims procedure.


----------



## wish wash

It's really annoying when things like this happen. Let's hope it doesn't affect your insurance too much for the next 5 years


----------



## Christian6984

Kash-Jnr said:


> I would have called the Police - at least then I would have a crime reference number for the claims procedure.


I have an incident number by lancashire police for reporting it, what would the police do if they did attend other than take his car off him? quotemehappy is saying that i am at fault without any evidence other than my description due to him not being insured. Although i have told them i have the photo's they haven't asked for them to base the decision of fault.


----------



## Christian6984

wish wash said:


> It's really annoying when things like this happen. Let's hope it doesn't affect your insurance too much for the next 5 years


Thankfully its my third year with them and only since it renewed in june do i have protected NCB, i still expect a rise, just hope its not too much or will be looking elsewhere. Been with QMH since 2009 and consistently one of the cheapest quotes I ever get


----------



## Radish293

It would be interesting to look at any photographs that show the start of your tyre marks. The impact that has caused the vehicle to yaw could indicate its position when first struck and would indicate that it was on the correct side of the road. The police would normally follow up a collision where the other driver is uninsured. If it’s confirmed the driver is uninsured your firm will foot the bill. It’s a matter of description of the collision. Other insurers have different descriptions. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Christian6984

have a video of the road conditions that shows the line the rear nearside tyre took but i struggle to see the line where it meets the tarmac as there are some dusty tyre marks from the road and some shaded area present



http://imgur.com/VPD4Iej


----------



## Shiny

I'm not sure if the helps, but pretty much insurance wise claims fall into 2 categories - 

1) Fault
2) Non-Fault

A non-fault claim is where the is no outlay by your own insurers or they make a 100% recovery of their outlay. NCB will not be affected.

A fault claim is were money is paid out to a third party and/or the insurers outlay for the policyholder's damage is not recovered in full. This would involve incidents like slipping on ice, being hit whilst parked and unattended, or a split liability claim. Fire, theft and malicious damage claims would even come under a fault claim, although these are usually listed separately. A pending clear cut case non-fault claim would even be classed as a fault claim until a recovery has been made. NCB will be affected (or a "loss of life" on protected NCB).

Think of it more of a terminology that refers whether a claims has been closed with nil payments (or a full recovery of outlay) or not, rather than who was actually to blame, although in most cases they do turn out to be the same thing.


----------



## Christian6984

Shiny said:


> I'm not sure if the helps, but pretty much insurance wise claims fall into 2 categories -
> 
> 1) Fault
> 2) Non-Fault
> 
> A non-fault claim is where the is no outlay by your own insurers or they make a 100% recovery of their outlay. NCB will not be affected.
> 
> A fault claim is were money is paid out to a third party and/or the insurers outlay for the policyholder's damage is not recovered in full. This would involve incidents like slipping on ice, being hit whilst parked and unattended, or a split liability claim. Fire, theft and malicious damage claims would even come under a fault claim, although these are usually listed separately. A pending clear cut case non-fault claim would even be classed as a fault claim until a recovery has been made. NCB will be affected (or a "loss of life" on protected NCB).
> 
> Think of it more of a terminology that refers whether a claims has been closed with nil payments (or a full recovery of outlay) or not, rather than who was actually to blame, although in most cases they do turn out to be the same thing.


Thank you, that makes sense to me. I really didn't take in what the call centre operator was saying as was talking so fast. As the driver is uninsured Quotemehappy have no way of recovering the payout they gave me for the car being written off and therefore class it as 'at fault'. The wording in their policy is somewhat confusing mind.

The paragraph on the top right, seems to suggest that NCB isnt affected where the accident isn't your fault and the driver was uninsured and provided them with the details of the car and driver. Would this suggest that even if your hit by someone uninsured as long as you give them these details it could still be classed as a non fault accident?


----------



## Shiny

That’s definitely what it says, similar to what Direct Line are advertising on the TV.

I love that they’ve put “no claim not a no blame” bonus in the actual policy. That’s a phrase Brokers have been using for at least 30 years. :lol:


----------



## Gas head

I would at least call the motor insurance bureau, I thought they specialise in claiming against uninsured drivers, at the very least they can give legal advise on the matter.

https://www.mib.org.uk/


----------



## Shiny

Gas head said:


> I would at least call the motor insurance bureau, I thought they specialise in claiming against uninsured drivers, at the very least they can give legal advise on the matter.
> 
> https://www.mib.org.uk/


If the OP has comprehensive cover then the MID won't get involved and the damage claim will need to made through his own insurers. By the looks of things this will be the best route anyway if the uninsured driver cover applies.

If there is an injury claim, then the MID may get involved.


----------



## Christian6984

Do i have any grounds to argue i was not at fault for the purposes of adding the claim to the policy, I feel irrepective of the fact he was insured or not that he was as fault and the photos which they havent seen would hopefully prove this is the case?


----------



## Shiny

If contested, this could be a difficult one to argue in my opinion. Looking at this impartially...

From the photos one of two things may have happened. One being the Mazda took the corner too wide, crossed lanes ad hit the side of your car on the bend. The other being that you took the corner too close to the apex and cut across the front end of the Mazda.

Any video evidence or witnesses? 

If there is a traceable third party and he is insured, it may be a case that this ends up 50/50 if there are two differing versions of events. 

I would still argue that you were not at fault and then you can push for the uninsured driver cover that is under the policy. If there is no identifiable third party to contest your version of events, then who is there to argue against it?


----------



## Christian6984

Shiny said:


> If contested, this could be a difficult one to argue in my opinion. Looking at this impartially...
> 
> From the photos one of two things may have happened. One being the Mazda took the corner too wide, crossed lanes ad hit the side of your car on the bend. The other being that you took the corner too close to the apex and cut across the front end of the Mazda.
> 
> Any video evidence or witnesses?
> 
> If there is a traceable third party and he is insured, it may be a case that this ends up 50/50 if there are two differing versions of events.
> 
> I would still argue that you were not at fault and then you can push for the uninsured driver cover that is under the policy. If there is no identifiable third party to contest your version of events, then who is there to argue against it?


no video evidence as neither has dashcams. There were no cars in front or behind at the immediate time of the accident and those that did pass after just drove on. The Mazda is neither taxed or insured and unless the insurer can get the details of the owner. I have submitted the 'Request information about a vehicle or its registered keeper from DVLA' to find if they will tell me who owns it if it helps


----------



## Gas head

its people like this that drive uninsured cars that need banning surprised the police haven't done much


----------



## Darlofan

Have you thought about putting details on local social media? Might be somebody that knows the car.


----------



## Christian6984

Gas head said:


> its people like this that drive uninsured cars that need banning surprised the police haven't done much


They said its a matter for insurance that was about it tbh. I know they will be able to find who the car is registered to, whether they do anything about it i don't know though, would they have to catch it being used on the road to do anything? I highly suspect for the age and miles and value of the blue mazda that it would certainly not be worth repairing. Prob moved onto another car.

I agree its annoying and is prob what shoves up insurance costs for us all.



Darlofan said:


> Have you thought about putting details on local social media? Might be somebody that knows the car.


It has been but not had any information now and its over a week. I know it wouldn't do much good as still has no insurer to claim off. What annoyed me more was being told i was at fault by my insurer without evidence of what occured beyond my description. They haven't seen any of these pictures. Also the wording of a claim in there policy is terribly worded. I have submitted a DVLA enquiry for information, will wait and see what comes back.


----------



## Radish293

I sympathise with your difficulties. I would be voting with my feet and taking my business elsewhere and changing insurers. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Andy from Sandy

The fact the uninsured car shouldn't of even been there when you were still makes it your fault.

If you vote with your feet you will have to declare the collision (probably on a common database so can be checked anyway that could result in insurance being declined that will cost you even more) and will probably have to pay more.


----------



## Christian6984

Andy from Sandy said:


> The fact the uninsured car shouldn't of even been there when you were still makes it your fault.
> 
> If you vote with your feet you will have to declare the collision (probably on a common database so can be checked anyway that could result in insurance being declined that will cost you even more) and will probably have to pay more.


its already declared :thumb:


----------



## PugIain

I was hit by an insured driver a fair few years ago. I got re-numerated via the MIB or something?

Not Men in black!


----------



## Christian6984

PugIain said:


> I was hit by an insured driver a fair few years ago. I got re-numerated via the MIB or something?
> 
> Not Men in black!


I thought i would have to deal with it myself and the MIB form looks a little complex but the insurer has appointed a solicitor to help claim back my excess. Also got to go for a medical for assessment of any injuries.


----------

