My friend whilst driving for a company using my uninsured personal vehicle was involved in a traffic accident.My friend has admitted fault and his company has paid the other party's insurer the vehicle repair cost.
However the other party (not at fault driver) has sued me for his car hire costs amounting $1500
So could I be held liable for the not at fault party's car hire costs?
Poll below
Thank yoooooou bargainers from OZ.
That's what i said too when i first heard about the accident
That’s what he was saying for you letting someone drive your uninsured vehicle.
Shouldn't other party claiming it from their insurance claim rather than claiming against you?
Seems like car hire is not covered by his car insurance policy.
Are you sure the other party is actually suing you?
Ie: a court summons, or small claims… or is it just a legal letter (like a C&D)
PS: Why was your car uninsured, without a dashcam, and why did you lend him your car keys?
And then the other orty’s Insurance conwikl try to get it back from someone - probably starting with the owner of the vehicle.
Car driver that caused the accident is liable. Sounds like car hire company got lazy by just suing registered owner and assumed owner was driver.
I have absolutely no idea how this insurance claims work.
But i thought the same, shouldnt the other party sue the driver, not the owner?
Yes. You are liable for car hire.
Why? I understand that the not at fault driver is car-less whilst it's being repaired, but to get a hire car is their choice. Their policy obviously didn't cover a hire car and they've taken it upon themselves to get one. Now the bills come in and they've been knocked back on their policy. Someone has seemingly told them to sue the 'at fault' driver and here we are. You are not automatically liable, which is why they're suing. It's an attempt to recover costs, but a half decent lawyer will get this thrown out as the not at fault driver made a clear choice. IE: They hired a car that wasn't covered by their policy.
why do you think companies like https://www.right2drive.com.au/ exist?
Your right to a loan car after an accident
Most people don’t know that if you’re not at-fault in a car accident, and more than one car is involved, you may have the right to a loan car with the costs covered by the at-fault party.
" why do you think companies like https://www.right2drive.com.au/ exist? "
To make a profit and drive up insurance policy premiums, they sure aren't around for fuzzy feelings and niceties. I never said the situation was right, just telling it as it actually is. If you don't have the use of a hire car actually listed on your policy then it is not automatically given to you. Often, insurance companies will even tell you that the costs aren't covered, even if it's not your fault. Which, is why the not at fault driver has taken legal action.
@Feathers: bottom line is that the not-at-fault driver has the right to a loan car after an accident.
@PissLUR: This, but this is incorrect and I'm sorry that you don't agree. Don't forget, I AGREE WITH YOU in that if it's not your fault, you shouldn't pay.
Follow the link that you provided and also see that the OP is UNinsured.
Unfortunately, it appears you do not qualify for an accident loan car.
For you to be eligible, you need to be not at-fault in a multi-vehicle accident, have the at-fault party details and the at-fault party must have >insurance.
You're right… hmm..
seems like they dont want to chase up debts from uninsured driver.
Op wasn't driving. Owning the car doesn't make xer liable. The driver is.
Surely you mean the at-fault driver is liable for the car hire costs, rather than the owner of the vehicle (OP)?
true. didnt realise that the company was already paying the other party's insurer the vehicle repair cost.
so OP will need to forward the car hire cost to the company.
You sue your friend
i was in an accident caused by the other driver, he wasnt paying attention in traffic, i get the impression he was checking his phone…
Our insurance company (mercedes) provided me a free hire car for the period of the repairs, the other driver (and his insurance company) were charged for this cost. It would have been quite expensive for them, but it was great to not be without a car
my uninsured personal vehicle
you've been on OzBargain for 4 years and seen all the other risk taking dummies without insurance posting their sad stories and still thought no Third Party Property or Comprehensive was a good idea?
Op wasn’t driving the vehicle. Not having insurance is the ozbargain way.
The OP is liable as the owner of the car, as that is who the non-at fault party will chase.
The OP can then chase the driver.
Why don't you just tell them you are not liable as you were not the driver. Tell them to chase the driver and company. Surely it's just like a traffic fine being sent automatically to the registered owner, and then the owner will need to sign the declaration to advise who was the driver…
Here's some clarification from Law Access NSW:
Whether or not you have to pay for the damage caused by someone borrowing your car will depend on why they were driving the car. If you asked for someone to use your car to do something for you, you may be responsible. But, if you lent them your car so they could use it for themselves, then you may not be responsible for the damage they cause. If someone else has an accident in your car, you should get legal advice.
Source: https://www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au/Pages/representing/lawassis…
Owners and drivers
People sometimes drive cars they do not own. If a person is at fault in an accident while they are driving a car they don't own, the owner and driver might both be responsible for the accident. An owner can be liable if the driver was an 'agent' of the owner. This is sometimes called 'vicarious liability'…You should get legal advice if:
- you lent your car to someone who then caused an accident, as you may be responsible for paying for the damage to the other car (depending on the circumstances).
Source: https://www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au/Pages/representing/lawassis…
Based on those quotes it would seem that the friends employer would be liable.
Yes and that's why the company already paid the insurer. Like it says, vicarious liability.
FFS.