It was silly for the car yard to have no insurance, but if the car yard owner had insurance wouldn't his insurance take the guy that crashed his car to court to recover their costs.So why can't a private person do the same. Also what has his age got to do with anything. What the judge is saying if you are under a certain age you don't have to pay. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/105744492/magistrate-tells-crashhit-car-dealer-he-chose-not-to-have-insurance
henderson_guy,
Jul 26, 5:45am
That's bullshit alright. How do these judges get appointed? Hope he speaks it
trackim,
Jul 26, 5:48am
Yep, sounds like it's always someone else's problem. Let's blame the VICTIM because a young idiot cause damage to a totally innocent business. A cop out by the judge, this is why our insurance premiums are so high. I think if the driver can afford a skyline (regardless of if it's on HP or not) he can afford to pay for the damage he has done. No accountability unfortunately. Wonder if the judge has ever been a victim.
snoopy221,
Jul 26, 5:49am
The Judge is saying if you are in business and have ALL of your assets in a public place fully open to the public and ANY associated potential loss you may suffer personally it would be prudent to insure against loss and very clearly is not prepared to make a court judgement for the amount.
Business owner Darryl MacDonald wants the defendant to stump up $13,000 for the repairs.
"I'm not prepared to be awarding a $13,000 reparation for someone who has chosen not to get their cars insured," she said. "I think some reparation is in order but I think for this man's age and previously clean record I wouldn't be going there."
trackim,
Jul 26, 5:54am
Yeah nah. It was a young driver been an idiot. Could be easily driven into an on coming car or crashed into someone's house etc. Shouldn't be an advantage to him because he was lucky enough to only crash into someones business.
snoopy221,
Jul 26, 6:05am
Goes both ways being in business is a learning curve and placing all of your assets in a notorious accident place generally means either insurance and or protective security around them or moving them further away from prominent danger
He had only been in business for about four months and said it was the fourth crash near his property.
"The cost to insure a car yard is just too expensive. and it's not the law, you don't have to have it."
Jensen ordered a report to be prepared to establish Whitinui's means and the amount of reparation he could afford to pay.
He was remanded at large to reappear on August 22.
gsimpson,
Jul 26, 6:32am
Wonder if he will upgrade the wooden posts to concrete blocks?
stevexc,
Jul 26, 6:43am
The insurance company would chase the money via civil means. Is there anything stopping the card yard owner from doing so? I'm assuming that the "community magistrate" is dealing with this as a criminal matter.
tigertim20,
Jul 26, 6:48am
absolute horseshit.
That 'judge' needs to give themselves an uppercut.
wayned,
Jul 26, 6:49am
Shouldn't the driver's insurance pay. If he didn't have any, then aren't they are both in the same boat. Insurance invalid cause drinking, even if Dealer was insured seems unfair his insurance has to pay and driver's gets a let off.
bigfatmat1,
Jul 26, 6:50am
He could still pursue this to recover money. This was just the sentencing of the guy for his driving. He would also probably get a better result as well. I know when my insurance company pursued someone for liability they gave them 10 days to cough up.money or a court order to seize goods would be given. Not courts bullshit $5 a week for 20 years
snoopy221,
Jul 26, 6:59am
Okay so instead of a Judge attack it simply comes back to Yes he has private civil channels to recover his losses. And if the Judge attack is correct perhaps we should all consider Not insuring our vehicles and expecting the Judiciary to fully compensate us when the driver is in court for driving charges mmmmmm
bwg11,
Jul 26, 7:14am
Fairly typical. What ever happened to "You break it, You pay for it"? A generation raised on the philosophy of no consequences and always some else's fault.
In my opinion an appalling decision by the judge. What right has the judge to say, "tough luck, you should have insurance" to the dealer? From my experience, their would be probably an excess of $2k per claim for each of the several cars damaged, to say nothing of the annual premium, which would not be insignificant. Totally irrespective of the fact he was over the alcohol limit.
Again, a shocking decision - what sort of message does it send? That the dealer, because he is in business, is a "rich prick", and should suck up the damage done by a third party?
nice_lady,
Jul 26, 5:14pm
Part of the problem is that to a Judge $13,000 is peanuts.
the-lada-dude,
Jul 26, 5:44pm
Kainamu Whitinui
Does the name have a bearing on the judgement ? . The yard is on Maori land, the fella was just tying to get to his ancestral grounds for f*** sake Maybe the local Iwi will claim for damages to their Marae . ho ho . just a random thought
milkath,
Jul 26, 6:37pm
The whole matter comes down to what the court was making judgement over. If it was about the persons driving, then the damage caused was secondary. both the police and the courts will say its a civil mater. different court, different rules. There could be many reasons why a judgement could not be made. The car yard could go through the small claims court if the amount sort is under $15,000.
kazbanz,
Jul 26, 6:52pm
I can't see any way the yard having or not having insurance can have any bearing in the matter. From my POV the yard owner chose to self insure. As such he pursues the guilty party through the same channels the insurance company would. Debt collectors etc. Nothing to do with the police conviction-except the conviction establishes fault.
amasser,
Jul 26, 9:08pm
Is the judge saying that you cannot hope for protection from a criminal act? Pay insurance premiums, excesses and perhaps increased premiums after. Should sue for full reparation. It may be prudent for a business owner to insure. It is also reasonable for a prudent person not to drink and drive. Age discrimination?
azzab54,
Jul 26, 11:31pm
A drunk driver wont have any insurance cover anyway.
elect70,
Jul 27, 12:37am
Hed have public liability insurance & cover if a test driver crashed a car . cant expect him to insure against a drunk crashing into his yard . The perp should pay all damages & costs now matter how long it takes . These magistrates arent even lawyers mostly JPs . It sends the wrong message to the perps Even district court may not be successful if hes got no money or job & car was on tick . My insurance tried to go after a solo mum after she ran red light but court wouldn t impose reparation as I had insurance cover & she couldnt afford to pay
headcat,
Jul 27, 12:43am
Makes you wonder if he allows potential buyers to test drive and if so is he insured for any damage his car causes a third party.
gazzat22,
Jul 27, 3:11am
the DIC is a criminal matter.The damage to the car(s) is a civil matter.The cost of insurance is a business expense like Rent,power,Telephone etc and a Business expense and Tax deductible. The Dealer will have to take the driver/owner to court and maybe get $5-$10 a week . maybe. !
richardmayes,
Jul 27, 3:44am
1994 Skidline, 2.0 litre, auto, no wof, reg on hold, 350,000kms, slammed on cutties, chrome mags (some curbing, no centre caps) not much needed done 4 WOF, goeZ hard 4 wat it iz, wanting 1000 or swaps for a PS4 (+ cash my way)
tamarillo,
Jul 27, 4:43am
Yes, it does.
kazbanz,
Nov 13, 3:57am
Actually guys. Just a heads up here. When the guy says insurance is expensive--he isn't talking say a grand a year. For $250000 cover which in real terms covers replacement of 10-20 cars You pay roughly $7500 a year. You have to agree that's a heck of a lot of coin to pony up with.
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.