A member of my staff (called "Ann" here for convenience) had a minor accident the other night coming off a roundabout. The roundabout is on a dual carriageway. It is a standard layout in terms of a left turn, straight ahead, right turn, with no signs to indicate that normal rules don't apply.
What Ann describes is that she was going straight across the roundabout. I've asked her if she kept to the left or took a "racing line", but right now she's a bit shook up and can't remember. I think she might have taken the racing line. She does know that she put her indicator on after passing the first exit.
On the dual carriageway approach to the roundabout, a car was driving behind her. When she went to turn into her intended exit, she checked to her left and saw the car which had been behind was trying to undertake her, so she veered on round the roundabout towards the right hand exit and braked to slow down. The following car was driving faster than her, and the rear OS wing on the following car collided with the front NS wing on Ann's car. The police who attended the scene apparently said that both drivers contributed to the accident, i.e. that neither was solely at fault. They did say that the other driver was in the wrong lane. They also said that Ann "should have been going slowly enough to stop" in anticipating that the other driver would try to continue around in the wrong lane from behind and undertake her and cut her up (not sure how they work that out).
When she reported the accident to her insurer, she got a shock when she was told that her policy had been cancelled a few months previously. Apparently, this is because when she started working for me and was advised to ensure that she had Business Class 1 cover, she contacted the insurer to arrange this. According to the insurer, there were insufficient funds in Ann's bank account at the point they tried to withdraw a payment for the additional premium for the business class cover. They did not contact Ann to inform her of this. Ann only became aware of a discrepancy after an irregular account charge appeared on her bank statement. She contacted the insurer in November to ask whether the payment had been requested on the wrong date. They told her they would have to listen to the recording of the call first, so she asked the insurer to phone her back with an answer to this. She did not hear from them again.
They now say that they wrote to her on four occasions to say that unless she contacted them, the full insurance premium would be cancelled, not just the business class insurance. She does not recall receiving any written correspondence from them, and she did not receive any refund of the premium (which was paid in advance in April - I have seen the policy which indicates cover was to run from April 2004 to April 2005).
They say that they consequently cancelled her policy on 15 December 2004. Ann has only found out about this as a result of the accident taking place. She has been asked to produce her insurance documents at the police station and now doesn't know what to do.
Firstly, what action can be taken with regard to the insurance cover?
Secondly, what approach can be taken with producing documents at the police station?
Thirdly, any thoughts as to whether the other driver was solely at fault?
--
andymc
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
|
The accident is one of "those" and everybody else can comment on that.
She received 4 letters from them threatening to cancel her insurance and she doesn't remember ? Well, excuse me. But I'd damn well know they had, or know they hadn't. Its not the sort of thing that I would receive, read, and then forget - 4 TIMES !!
Two possibilities;
They wrote to her last known address cancelling her insurance - there is nothing you can do.
They didn't write to her at her last known address warning of impending cancellation then she is still insured.
I suggest that you need to truly get to the bottom of her memory difficulties before taking any further steps.
There may well have been no return premium since the increased premium of business cover may have used all the premium up.
Not wishing to be rude, but it all sounds way dodgy to me and if I were you I would be careful. Especially if she was driving on your business at the time of the accident. I also suspect that there had been some misunderstanding of what business cover was required and how much it would cost.
As for producing the documents, well she isn't insured. And if the police realise that, then they are going to do something about it. Don't think that showing the certificate, which she presumably still has, is the way forward. They are frequently, perhaps usually, checked.
|
>>"should have been going slowly enough to stop"
Speaking from my own and others' experience, you do wonder whether Police Officers attending RTAs are capable of saying anything else.
|
|
On the Producer front, on the one occasion I had to show my documents at the local Police Station, the desk clerk just gave them a cursary glance and wrote the reference number in a big ledger, I asked if I could get a receipt or similar to show I'd complied but she couldn't even do that.
|
Q1.
I doubt very little. Insurance Company have made policy void so use has not been covered by Insurance and if as stated journey was in connection with the business of another, then that firm also for using without insurance.(Has the business any Insurance that would cover her?)
Q.2.
She could of course go to the police and produce the certificate from the void policy which would appear to all intents and purposes cover her. A very dangerous course of action as a serious offence of using a certificate of Insurance with intent to deceive and which can carry time in pokey punishment with large fine.
If she doesn't produce then Plod will chase for interview. Consider telling her to go to Plodhouse before the 7 days limit expires and explain all as you have said. The Insurance offence will not go away and also may attract further offence of failing to surrender Certificate when policy made void. At least her explanation will be recorded from the outset and can be raised at Court later and may be taken as mitigation by Their Worships. (I concur with the remarks of Mark RLBS above on this but a change of address may have occurred).
Q.3.
Accident to me is a 50/50 blame.
DVD
|
A producer for an accident should be 'record' details, not just 'check' The majority of producer will be for a check, so if there is an issue the station clerk will pick up on it.
When an offence has occured/possibly occured it should be noted the docs are to be recorded. The producer will say what is happening.
|
|
if it were me i would bluff it with the producer and pay out for any damage . then i would get the insurance sorted out properly, we all learn from our mistakes . oh and i am not advising that they do this just stating how i would deal with it, there again i wouldn't have got myself into that situation as regards the insurance...cheers...keo.
|
First off, thank you to everybody for such swift, considered and detailed replies.
Mark:
"She received 4 letters from them threatening to cancel her insurance and she doesn't remember?"
Perhaps I phrased that without my usual high standard of clarity ;) - I should have said that according to her, she hasn't received anything. However, around the time this was happening, she was going through the demise of a long-term relationship - I don't know what possible ramifications of that might be, if any. She has had a change of address, but this took place shortly after Christmas, not at the time the insurer says the policy was cancelled (15 Dec). She is smart and also scrupulously honest, so I don't think she would try to pull a fast one, or equally have received documents and just forgotten.
At this stage, and having overheard her phonecalls to her insurer, I have a feeling that your second possibility is more likely, and that a call centre drone is providing the usual customer disservice. I spoke to her this evening and she said that she has had a phonecall with the actual insurance company (as opposed to the agent) which seems to imply the policy may still be in place after all?! I wish I could be clearer about this, but it was a garbled call with poor mobile phone reception - I'll try to clarify ASAP.
To be honest, I'm confused as to whether the entire policy should have been cancelled at all - surely only the business use cover should have been retracted? Or would the insurer take the attitude that the nature of use has changed overall and so an entirely new policy is required?
I think her increased premium quote for business cover was only about £40. The overall cost of the policy was over £600, and this was about two-thirds of the way through the year - I don't the remaining cover already paid for would have been eaten up by the business class premium.
She was going home from work at the time of the accident.
GrahamF1:
An interesting piece of information that was discovered later on today was that the other driver is a "sort of" colleague of the police who attended the scene (deliberate vagueness on my part). /Cynical mode on/ (and most emphatically not casting aspersions on BiB in general, in fact I'm involved in an aspect of their work in a professional capacity), I wonder whether or not this could relate to the reluctance to assign blame to the other driver.
I saw the car some time after starting this thread, and the impact marks are most definitely to the side, not the front - how can one be deemed to be driving too quickly when the impact is from the side? /Cynical mode off/
Truckosaurus, runboy & keo
She will be seeing the police within the seven days, she's trying to find out whether the insurer will re-instate the cover, but if this isn't successful she will be telling the truth, whole truth & nothing but when explaining what has happened.
DVD
1.
The only other relevant work-based policy in place is for personal accident cover (in addition to the usual public & employer liability). T&Cs of employment are that the employee is responsible for securing appropriate vehicle insurance in relation to work-related travel as no company vehicle exists (it's her own car) so no company car insurance policy either.
2.
see 2 paragraphs above - I am very sure she wouldn't dream of it! I agree best course of action if the insurance situation can't be resolved is to do this, plus inform BiB that she is still taking action with insurance company.
3.
"Accident to me is a 50/50 blame."
Interested in your opinion as to why - is this because of my speculation that she took the racing line? If so, do you think your view would be different if she hasn't taken a racing line, or is there more to it than that?
Again, thank you all very much. Wish I had this level of knowledge & experience to share!
--
andymc
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
|
says the policy was cancelled (15 Dec). She is smart and also scrupulously honest, so I don't think she would try to pull a fast one, or equally have received documents and just forgotten. At this stage, and having overheard her phonecalls to her insurer, I have a feeling that your second possibility is more likely, and that a call centre drone is providing the usual customer disservice. I spoke to her this evening and she said that she has had a phonecall with the actual insurance company (as opposed to the agent) which seems to imply the policy may still be in place after all?!
>>
first of all, let ushope that the policy is still in place.
having said that, my comments:
you say in your first post:
"When she reported the accident to her insurer, she got a shock when she was told that her policy had been cancelled a few months previously. Apparently, this is because when she started working for me and was advised to ensure that she had Business Class 1 cover, she contacted the insurer to arrange this. According to the insurer, there were insufficient funds in Ann's bank account at the point they tried to withdraw a payment for the additional premium for the business class cover. They did not contact Ann to inform her of this. Ann only became aware of a discrepancy after an irregular account charge appeared on her bank statement. She contacted the insurer in November to ask whether the payment had been requested on the wrong date. They told her they would have to listen to the recording of the call first, so she asked the insurer to phone her back with an answer to this. She did not hear from them again. "
how does this square with what then you say in your second post: "She is smart " .
in that case, she will have kept a record of the dates, times, names of people she spoke to. she would also have realised that she had not received her new insurance certificate. she would also have chased them after they failed to come back with a check on the tape recording.
she needs to get herself better organised from now on, and keep diligent records of all telephone conversations. she must make sure she knows who she is talking to. at a minimum, she must speak to a named senior manager of her assumed "insurers".
|
|
|
any. She has had a change of address, but this took place shortly after Christmas, not at the time the insurer says the policy was cancelled (15 Dec). She is smart
just a p.s. to add that i thought of later.
what did the insurers say at the time she advised them of her change of address?
because if they accepted her instructions to change the address, they must have considered her policy to be valid at the time of the change of address.
another question: has she had her licence and vehicle address changed? ( another legal requirement ! )
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Folks,
Thought I'd finally take the plungs and register an account- you have to start somewhere, so this I guess is as good a place as any :o)
Andymc{P} allow me to make my contribution as follows:
1. This roundabout that you refer to, I assume has THREE lanes and not the usual TWO. IF it has THREE lanes and "Ann" was in the middle lane and looking to go straight, then the car on her inside (which would be in the turn LEFT only lane) did a naughty manouver and tried to nip past her. In doing so, this driver (on her INSIDE) caused "Ann" to swerve and collide with a vehicle on her OUTSIDE. In the absence of a Third Party Independant witness, "Ann" will be held at fault because any Insurance company would ask you to provide a registration plate for this 'phantom' car - or produce any evidence that this car was responsible. In the absence of any such 'evidence' "Ann" will be held at fault because she was the one who 'came into contact' with the other car (the one on her OUTSIDE). Thus she IS to blame. I do not therefore beleive for one minute "Ann" took the racing line on a roundabout with three lanes since they tend to be on the large side.
2. If this roundabout had TWO lanes, then again it makes little difference, except that it places even more blame on "Ann" because she took the 'racing line' and by moving across to her RIGHT gave the driver behind her the indication that she was going right, so this driver accelerated to pass "Ann" (NOTE: this would NOT be undertaking since the road before him is clear and he believes that "Ann" is turning right) and once committed has no choice but to go through with the manouver. Had "Ann" NOT taken the 'racing line' then this car on her INSIDE would never have crept up beside her and "Ann" would never have swerved and hit the car on her OUTSIDE. Again "Ann" is at fault for reasons above in Poin # 1.
3. The damage to both cars is quite consistent with one of the cars changing lanes. The Law is quite clear on this that it is the responsibility of the driver who is MAKING THE LANE CHANGE to ensure it is SAFE to do so; So by taking the racing line and swanning across the roundabout, "Ann" was changing lanes - for if she had been continuing as she should have, then she would never have collided with the car on her OUTSIDE but rather with the car on her INSIDE. The irony being that had "Ann" collided with the car on her INSIDE it would have been blatantly obvious who was at fault from the impact, especially if the roundabout had THREE lanes.
4. The advice the Police gave is quite correct. Easy to question the Police isn't it? But think of what the highway Code says? You must leave enough distance between you and the car infront so as to avoid shunting them from behind. That goes for cars around you. I would hazard a guess that "Ann" didn't read the road conditions correctly and was going too fast and/or not aware of what was on her OUTSIDE and around her. I do not believe the Police gave a judgement on who was to blame etc. since this is expressly against Policy. And if no driver was summonsed (for carelss driving or driving w/o due care and attention etc.) then as far as the Police are concerned, it is a matter for the insurance companies to sort out. They DO NOT give judgements on who was to blame etc.
5. With regards to the cancelled insurnace. It's best to own up and say she doesn't have insurance because if she doesn't declare this fact to the police when she produces her documents, then the other driver WILL contact Police to report the fact that when his Insurance company contacted "Anns" they told him she wasn't covered - then if "Ann" has produced the Insurance document and NOT admitted she was NOT insured then she commits a variety of offences, namely deception and uttering a document as true when she knows it not to - as well as driving with no insurance. Courts WILL hammer her for that. She has no option but to admit she ahs no insurance and plead her case in Court. Remember, Traffic is one of the EASIEST prosecutions for the CPS to bring (think of speeding tickets etc.) and a case of NO INSURANCE is very much 'open and shut'. She doesn't want to have be seen as lieing/deceiving. Best advice: Own up, plead your case and admit your guilt.
6. Most Polcie Forces (and i'm talking about the 43 in England & Wales) will have RECORD details for accidents, some now do it as a matter of course NO MATTER why Police attended. You can lie only so much, and when Insurance details are checked by the Police linked to the Insurers Database, BINGO - she will get found out. Follow advice in point # 5.
Sounds harsh, but we all like to think that we are good drivers - but mistakes happen and I would urge you to have "Ann" take her memory pills and get her memory back in order so she doens't forget or is confused - chances ar very good she will get found out especially when the guy whose car she hit realises she doesn't have insurnace - I know I would be livid and contact the Police ASAP to have her prosecuted, wouldn't you?
Best thing "Ann" can do is pop down to her local 'Nick, admit the offence of no insurance and go from there.
|
|
|
