Got side swiped by a driver changing lanes, he never saw the dodge ram beside him , he tells me sorry I should have looked first before changing gives me phone number and name ,also then tell he is not insured because its a cheapy my insurance company cant get hold of him ,wont return calls.so I end up paying the excess and he carries on around NZ Just not right, no fault but pay for it
franc123,
Jan 3, 6:43am
Did you not get the plate number of the car or drivers licence details?. I sure as hell wouldn't have accepted just a name or mobile number! The phone has probably been ditched by now.
dr.doolittle,
Jan 3, 6:47am
Perhaps the ins co will have him stopped at the airport. I doubt it, but would nice if it happened.
socram,
Jan 3, 6:56am
I doubt it too! One of the reasons that some of us believe that 3rd party insurance should be mandatory.
It is the innocent who come off second best whilst the guilty can (and do) just walk away. Sure it is expensive, but it naturally weeds out those who have a poor record or are too young to be driving car capable of warp factor 9.
If youngsters could only afford a nana wagon, or had to stay on 2 wheels or a pushbike for an extra year or two, is that really so bad?
cammey,
Jan 3, 8:55am
It wouldn't help do anything except push up insurance prices for everyone. Those that don't bother with WOFs and rego already wont be bothered with insurance.
And even if they are insured they will often be outside the terms of their licence, and therefore will have the claim declined.
But most of all, even if at fault, every single claim will be contested. Even really simple cases can get very complicated if stories go divergent.
Best to have the best cover you can afford for yourself. Either way its your only chance.
sw20,
Jan 3, 9:00am
You take a photo of their car, rego plate and licence label with your phone, when they give you their cell phone number you ring it while you are standing there with them to see if they are a bullshit artist, if you can, get a photo of the drivers licence/passport depending on if they are kiwi or tourist.
tweake,
Jan 3, 9:12am
yeah mate found the same thing. they buy a cheap car, no rego, no wof, hoon around. get caught multiple times, owed something in the range of $5,000-10,000 in fines and he just flys home leaving us to clean up his mess.
lookoutas,
Jan 3, 7:04pm
Had a guy come in before Xmas who got his R's & L's mixed up - had a Beemer he'd paid 2K for, and had run it into the bank, so his holiday was looking doomed. Offered him a deal on the one I had sitting there (sorry - intrades virus kicking in again. Change "deal" into "steal") But he didn't have the bucks. "Buggarit" It was a K's worth just to pull it back into shape and it still needed a bumper and headlight to keep the cops from hassling him. Think he headed back to Auckland.
In some ways, I like these twits with no cover and a cheapish registered car, so long as they take out no-one else. Their pain and possibly my gain.
elect70,
Jan 4, 3:03am
Good reason to for you to have comprehensive insurance . Lets the insurance co do all the work of attempting to recover costs . Me i wouldnt leave home without it , had 2 cases of being pranged by no insurance drivers .1 was aslo mum & ins said waste of time chasing her up as the've got no money anyway .
franc123,
Jan 4, 3:29am
That's right, while its not fair to responsible drivers it is far better to just pay up and let the insurance co do the financial buttreaming of the at fault party. While I agree with the principle of compulsory third party, what would it achieve? It would just put costs up further, and you only have to watch those UK cop shows to realise that prowling about in the traffic trying to order uninsured drivers off the road simply isn't a good use of police resources. A lot of these fools are not insured for a reason. nobody would touch them anyway.
socram,
Jan 4, 3:29am
If a car is driven without current rego/insurance in the UK, in some counties, they confiscate the car for 28 days and it is not returned until everything is paid up, plus storage fees.
The illegal ones can't keep replacing their cars for ever if they are confiscated.
It now costs me about $1600 a year to cover 4 cars on the road plus a trailer including one brand new vehicle. If I have to have my car repaired because some other numpty who is uninsured runs in to me, who pays in the long run? Me - and the other drivers who are insured. Who gets away with it? Yup, the guilty one.
Maybe 3rd party insurance should be lumped in with petrol taxes? User pays. Difficult to avoid and our petrol is still half the price of fuel in the UK.
If you want fully comp, you pay as now, but you would be paying less.
cammey,
Jan 4, 3:46am
Yep. And they have around the same rate of vehicles insured as we do.
But thats not the point.
Even if the premium has been paid, you wont get paid out.
The guy who changes lanes into you will insist it was the other way around. You will need to go find witnesses, go to court and even then maybe loose.
Then if you win and he IS liable, his insurer will decline the claim. As he was on a learner licence, and had a passenger. Or was driving outside of his curfew hours.
Its a waste of time and money.
Insure yourself. Stop relying on the other guys cover, it will let you down.
gammelvind,
Jan 4, 3:47am
While in theory I agree with you, in practice we would all pay more as once those thieving insurance companies get their claws into something that is compulsory they take it as an opportunity to plant another money tree with the roots in our pockets. I was always on the side of compulsory third party until I saw what happened in Europe where insurance costs are obscene compared to here. The cost of the occasional excess payment is still a huge saving compared to the increased overall fees that will eventually occur.
tony9,
Jan 4, 3:58am
The compulsory third party cover in the UK and many other countries is to cover personal accident medical costs only. Not third party property damage.
So we have that situation which is paid via the petrol tax and licensing ACC component.
BTW, many have not read the OP properly. He is complaining about paying the excess, not all his own property damage.
stornello,
Jan 4, 4:00am
Isn't this what you are insured for? Your car gets smacked up, they pay for repair. It shouldn't have anything to do with who hit you, you pay the premiums, it's a risk you both undertake. they take your money, surely they have to uphold their end of the bargain. Insurance companies are scum, they want it all their own way. Paying the excess is something you signed up for isn't it?
tamarillo,
Jan 4, 4:20am
Incorrect in UK at least. Compulsory tp covers property, vehicle, medical of other party you cause damage too. Can't speak of other places.
tony9,
Jan 4, 4:31am
I stand corrected.
zetec,
Jan 4, 6:48am
In Australia (WA anyway) it is compulsory third party personal accident only. If you want third party property cover, like here, you have to take out a policy. The registration fee in WA includes the third party accident cover and is around A$800 per year.
curlcrown,
Jan 4, 8:17am
If you have full insurance you don't have to worry about whether any one else has insurance so why the constant calls to make third party insurance compulsory?
gsimpson,
Jan 4, 8:28am
Excess payments?
sw20,
Jan 4, 8:38am
Some people want to control other peoples lives.
elect70,
Jan 5, 3:09am
Agree compulsory 3rd party damage insurance would lead to insurance companies ramping up the costs big time . . If can afford a car at least afford 3rd party ins , wouldnt want to hit a lambo or similar & pay for it rest of your life
gsimpson,
Jan 5, 3:34am
We already have ACC component on registration that is government controlled. Not hard to add a 3rd party cover to it. Government can cap and control premiums as they do with ACC.
socram,
Jan 5, 5:29am
How do you work that out? Before you can rego/tax your car, you have to have a WoF/Mot AND produce evidence of 3rd party insurance, which does cover damage to any third party's vehicle.
If you were correct, then a high proportion of cars would be driving illegally and I really don't think that is the case.
Whereas here, we get 16 year olds driving Nissan Skylines and equally powerful cars, the UK youngsters are generally restricted to less powerful cars - unless they are pretty well off, or they are very likely to attract attention from the police.
Over there, it is almost the way it always was, with under 1300cc cars being very popular as first cars.
vtecintegra,
Jan 5, 5:34am
Nope that's where it all falls down - old cars (especially at the hard to insure end of the market) are even cheaper in the UK than they are here and there is always a limitless supply of them.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.