Froddy
Member
- Messages
- 1,072
I’m so sorry to hear about this, and so glad you’re okay. What a terrible ordeal for you ...
My understanding of the legal position is this:
The third party insurers may argue/are arguing either that the other driver failed to declare her mental illness, or that her deliberate actions are not insured. Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 they may seek a declaration that the policy is to be avoided. Unless or until the contract is avoided, they will retain a statutory duty to satisfy any judgment obtained against her.
If they get that declaration, it’s not the end of the matter. Article 75 is invoked when a driver is uninsured but there is a policy in existence which covers the car driven by the driver at fault.
The MIB (Motor Insurers Bureau) is there to ensure that no innocent motorist goes uncompensated if they are involved in an RTA with an uninsured driver, so all insurers club together to fund such claims. However, if a policy can be identified for the car in question, that insurer has an Article 75 duty to foot the bill. In your case, there is an insurer, but they are refusing contractual indemnity to her, so that they can sue her for any money paid out to you.
So, hopefully, you won’t have any problems and there’s no need to worry. Her insurers are teeing up their claim against her and sorting out their Article 75 status.
Article 75 certainly is not new, and there is no fresh legislation to be concerned about as far as I’m aware.
Thank God you’re okay, and let’s hope it all gets sorted out swiftly ...
My understanding of the legal position is this:
The third party insurers may argue/are arguing either that the other driver failed to declare her mental illness, or that her deliberate actions are not insured. Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 they may seek a declaration that the policy is to be avoided. Unless or until the contract is avoided, they will retain a statutory duty to satisfy any judgment obtained against her.
If they get that declaration, it’s not the end of the matter. Article 75 is invoked when a driver is uninsured but there is a policy in existence which covers the car driven by the driver at fault.
The MIB (Motor Insurers Bureau) is there to ensure that no innocent motorist goes uncompensated if they are involved in an RTA with an uninsured driver, so all insurers club together to fund such claims. However, if a policy can be identified for the car in question, that insurer has an Article 75 duty to foot the bill. In your case, there is an insurer, but they are refusing contractual indemnity to her, so that they can sue her for any money paid out to you.
So, hopefully, you won’t have any problems and there’s no need to worry. Her insurers are teeing up their claim against her and sorting out their Article 75 status.
Article 75 certainly is not new, and there is no fresh legislation to be concerned about as far as I’m aware.
Thank God you’re okay, and let’s hope it all gets sorted out swiftly ...