Crashed My 33 And Insurance Wont Pay?

[jaymze_1990]

Need some help otherwise I'm farked! Anyone here know what I can do?

I got in an accident just before christmas came around a corner in the wet and back came out and then I slid

the other way and hit this women in a magna. And insurance are sayin they wont pay cause my car is a

turbo and cause I have p-plates I cant drive a turbo. But they took my money when I got insurance with them.

I called just cars and told them that they took my money so they have to pay but the person said that the guy

they sent to look at my car told them it was a turbo and they had pictures of the engine bay abd that it

wasnt rodworthy cause the back tires are bald so they don't have to pay.

This is such farking shit. The p-plate law is stupid anyway and I shouldnt have to pay. The women is insured with

the same insurance company as me so are they just trying to get out of paying? They sent a letter saying I owe her

$7000 and have til Feb 10 to pay.

[HairyMerkin]

Is it a turbo?

[jaymze_1990]

Yea its a 33 gtst. But I told them that when I insured it.

[HairyMerkin]

Bad luck.

[NORBY]

he's right, your isurance has a clause saying if you cant drive the car legally and you crash it bad luck. Your insurance would be valid if you werent driving it though, thats why they took your money. You knew the rules mate and you broke them.

[jrm]

You broke the law with driving a turbo car on P's and have an unroadworthy car - what do you think's going to happen?

[J'z-R33]

Did you read the PDS when you bought the insurance? look at page 20 question 4 and 6.

http://www.justcarinsurance.com.au/library...ve-Brochure.pdf

Solution:

Part the R33 out and get some cash, call the lady with the magna and get some quotes to repair.

Good luck,

[Beer Baron]

d'oh! as the others said you were driving the car illegally, AND if your rear tyres were bald then your car was also not roadworthy. Given that by your own admission the crash was caused by your rear end loosing traction in the wet they can quite justifiably argue that the bald tyres were the cause of the accident. really dude, having good quality tyres that are in good condition is the most basic form of maintaining a car. It's the most basic yet most important safety feature on your car. with bald tyres it wont matter how good your brakes are or how good your suspension is etc, you are still driving a death trap.

unfortunately being that the other driver was not at fault and has insurance they will pay out her claim, and then they will pursue you through the courts for their money back. they will most likely refund some or all of your premium though.

if you still think you have some kind of case here then my advice is to get a lawyer asap. a decent one. at the moment you are looking at $7K for her car, plus whatever repairs your car needs so you have a fair bit at stake here. definitely worth getting some proper legal advice, not just from anonymous users on the internet....

[Beer Baron]

Did you read the PDS when you bought the insurance? look at page 20 question 4 and 6.

http://www.justcarinsurance.com.au/library...ve-Brochure.pdf

Solution:

Part the R33 out and get some cash, call the lady with the magna and get some quotes to repair.

Good luck,

nup, he has no chance of working this out with the magna owner directly now or making her offers or organising the repair at a favourable place etc. because she has now made a claim with her insurance. they pay her, and now the insurance company will want him to pay them back. so there is zero chance of bargaining etc. he will almost certainly have to pay the insurance company the $7K they are asking for.

[J'z-R33]

Thanks for clearing that up Richard..

[Beer Baron]

as it says in the PDS J'z R33 posted which they would have sent with your policy:

ARE YOU COVERED?

If the driver of your car was not licensed or authorised to drive it. NO

ARE YOU COVERED?

If your car was in an unroadworthy or unsafe condition that contributed to the accident being a condition that was known to and disregarded by you. NO

so they have 2 ways to deny your claim. your only real way out is to somehow demonstrate that the tyres were not bald and that the car was roadworthy (going to be hard if it's not true) and then you still have the problem of driving a car that you are not legally able to drive...

edti: no worries Johno. good link to the PDS too. that should make things pretty clear to the OP. but like I said, if he still wants to fight it he's going to need some legal help and he's going to be risking even more money (in legal costs).

[**RB2530**]

Insurance acts to insulate you from the stupidy of others...It does not protect 'you' from 'your' own stupidity...Thats the job of your own 'common sense'. Hopefully now you have a bit more of that inside your head...

[MSTRshenanigans]

Mate, I'm sending you a PM... I'll talk to you about your options from here, moving forward... most/all of the people above are not industry professionals.

[dan_the_man]

mate

why did you drive a car that you were not licensed to drive?

you can't play tricks with insurance companies. they get this shit every day

[MSTRshenanigans]

Some legit info about drivings cars in VIC if you are in VIC... regarding restricted vehicles and the only exempted turbo'd/super'd vehs...

http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licens...tedvehicles.htm

Here are the forms for applying to use a skyline on your P's in VIC..

http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/Licens...gedvehicles.htm

Waiting for you to reply to my PM mate, I need your COI. Financial practise laws mean they cannot sell you a product if you are the sole driver.

[Blitz]

You may have told Just Car Insurance that your car was a GTS-T, but were they aware you were a P Plater or did you neglect to mention that?

At the end of the day, you were well aware that driving a GTS-T on your P-Plates was illegal, yet you knowing went ahead and obtained an insurance policy. Surely with half a brain you did realize that regardless of the fact that Just Car 'took your money', if you had an accident which you now have and the full story came out in the wash, your policy would be deemed null and void right?

And lets not even get started on driving a car with bald tyres.

Don't stand there bitching and moaning about how terrible the law is, because the very law you knowingly broke is the same law that was put in place to protect other drivers from individuals like you who are too young, irresponsible and incapable of controlling a high powered car.

You don't have a leg to stand on, period.

[R33GTRKid]

people not knowing anything telling you too bad shit me.

Your insurance company would have taken full details off you, asked you whether your were on P's and also what car you were seeking to insure.

If as you say you told them it was a GTST (they should know it is a turbo) and that you were on P's then you complied with your obligation of disclosure to them. By them proceeding to take your money and promising to insure you as a driver in the nominated vehicle, there was consideration, and therefore a binding legal contract. Further they represented that you had insurance.

With respect to the fact you are a P-plater and it is illegal to drive a turbo, they had a duty to act in utmost good faith and inform you of potential issues with the insurance cover including that it was a breach of their insurance policy for someone unlicensed to drive the insured vehicle - the fact they knew this, did not tell you and entered into the contract of insurance is clearly an implied waiver of that condition that they are now seeking to rely upon (not referring to unroadworthy issue at this point). If you were nominated as the sole driver then the Insurance Act prevents them from issuing the insurance in the first place!

If your tyres were indeed illegal, then you are really in a world of pain because it is going to be more likely than not (standard of proof) that bald tyres contributed to the accident in wet conditions.

If however the tyres were completely legal this is what you do immediately:

1. write to the insurer and tell them you dispute their decision and want it immediately reviewed through their internal dispute resolution procedures. Ask them to send you a log of the call that you made when taking out the insurance also. This should be on your file. Carefully check your certificate of insurance, it should say the type of car and that you are on P's.

If they do not come to the party after that stop, you then complain to the insurance ombudsman and the department of consumer and employment protection.

Finally if no good, you then sue them for:

1. misrepresentation s.53 of the Trade Practices Act;

2. misleading and deceptive conduct s.52 of the Trade Practices Act;

3. breach of Contract; and

4. negligence.

Edited January 14, 2010 by R33GTRKid

[Tony de Wonderful]

You are lucky you didn't crash into a Ferrari or something.

[Beer Baron]

even if you can somehow convince them that they agreed to insure you for a car you can't legally drive you still have the problem of the bald, unroadworthy tyres. I'd love to hear how these "experts" think you will get out of that one... you did not properly maintain your car, and the unroadworthy tyres caused your accident. if you can get them to pay that out then I might get you to represent me in any future legal matters.

oh, and you still have a duty to read the PDS which clearly states that if you are driving a car you are not legally able to drive that you will NOT BE COVERED. the PDS spells out all the conditions of the policy and it's up to you to read and understand it. your insurance is conditional on that.

[MSTRshenanigans]

Blitz, please spare us your 'knowledge'... Under the Financial Practises Act the customer does NOT need to know their product, it is the job of the INSURER to ensure the customer does not have an incorrect product. They must know if he is on P's and the vehicle type, knowing the INSURER involved their system would not allow it to be printed and paid for unless they did something dodgey. eg they did not put in the right date of birth or did not list him on the car at all. The fact of the matter is a person shouldn't have to reasonably know if they can or cannot have the insurance policy - that is what the salesperson's job is for.

He is entitled to a full refund of his policy as it is null and void, period. Further he can dispute this with their disputes area and you may find that the Financial Ombudsman would likely rule in HIS favour over the insurer because they incorrectly sold a policy, that is if their internal dispute resolution area does not overturn it. He has the info he needs to cover his behind and sort the stuff out and I pray he stops reading this thread.