...... is it?!?! Scots biker in insurance hell after legal loophole forces him to pay thousands for death crash on his old bike - British Bikers Association - British Bikers Association News This cannot be the law, surely?!?!?!
Doesn't sound right, but there again Insurance Companies do seem to make up their own rules. Would expect this to go to a higher court where hopefully it would get sorted, but never forgetting the propensity of the Law to make an arse of itself. As this happened in Scotland where the Laws/Courts can be different in may not affect the rest of the UK.
The insurance co's are a law into themselves in the first place and pretty much do as they please to make sure it doesn't end up being there profits that are affected! Any policy I have had in many years for both car and bikes states in bold text that only policy holder and named drivers are covered by the policy........so how could the previous owner and policy holder be liable and have to pay out from his policy for a non named driver?
Nope it's right. Always always cancel your insurance when you sell a vehicle. I sold my bike but didn’t cancel my insurance | White Dalton Solicitors Blog
I must admit, I did not know that. Phew, I have been lucky then. Really feel for the guy, it just seems so wrong. I assumed the contract would have been void if I was no longer the owner thus never bothered to cancel. Won't make that mistake again.
Thats fucking disgusting. Insurance companies are cunts. Sorry for alls the swearing this early but its really wound me up this!!!
This is nothing new, it has been happening for years. It is legal and has been an accepted practice for many years that if a policy is in force, then it can be claimed against even though the policy holder had no control or influence on the crash other than they failed to cancel their policy. I know of half a dozen cases where this has happened, although fortunately they did not invlve a fatality. It has even happened where a vehicle has been stolen, been crashed and the policy has been claimed against. If I remember correctly though, the crashes have occured before the theft of the vehicle was reported, but still not right
You're right tyke,insurance companies are c**ts,but when a vehicle is involved in an accident if it has insurance the company are liable,this is something they would prob wriggle out of paying if they could. Genuine mistake the guy didn't phone his insurers to say he'd sold the bike or trying to score another full years no claims? Am sur if he was paying monthly he'd have phoned them.
Bear in mind that this sort of thing could also happen if you let someone test drive a car or test ride your bike when looking to sell and you allow them to drive or ride on your insurance
Indeed, I have always made sure my insurance was either cancelled or changed over to new bike on my date of sale, after all if we are still paying for the insurance we are libel, I thought everyone would have known that? clearly not
I wonder if there are some policy-specifics involved. For example, my policy specifically states it covers ONLY ME to ride the motorcycle. Therefore, surely, if someone else crashed on my bike (with or without my permission) the insurance would be null and void?!?!?
Not always the case. Third party cover usually remains in place, and because the policy is active, insurance companies have difficulty in wiggling their way out.
not for 3rd party as you own the insurance, so the 3rd party can make a claim from you **EDIT** T.C beat me to it lol
So because the policy is still in place the insurance company has to pay up, but then they come and get the money from you. So the policy can't really still be in place or else the insurance company would take the financial hit and you would just lose NCD. We really do live in a f**ked up country.
