Insurance void if Illegally parked

[vikks99]

Hi Can anyone help please? If a vehicle is illegally parked on double yellow lines, is the insurance company liable if that vehicle causes an accident, or does the vehicles insurance become void? Thanks in advance

[vikks99]

tigerlily11 - the car door wasn't opened until my friend drew level with him. The driver of the other car just opened his door onto my friends car - but he is saying that the door was already opened and my friend drove into it.

[vikks99]

ethel - the driver was not stopped on double yellow lines, he had just parked there after reversing out of his garage yard. His engine was switched when the incident happened.

It was 4.50pm and we are presuming he was parking the car for the customer to pick up. And to clear his yard for the night.

[Ethel]

My point is it is legal to stop on double yellow lines for a variety of reasons. You are allowed to drop off and pick up passengers, or load goods.

The fact that he was stopped on double yellow lines will not make any difference to the insurance. His insurance is valid.

The fault is the same whether there were yellow lines or not.

He opened the car door without checking the mirrors. He is liable and his insurance is valid.

[vikks99]

Ethel - I see what you mean now - thank you very much for your points.

[chas2008]

Ethel is 100% correct, his insurance is valid, i work in the motortrade we are dealing with claims all day long , there are far far worse claims that are paid out, parking on yellow lines wouldnt even be considered as a reason not to pay out..As for misunderstoods comment about not paying out through neglect, are not a majority of accidents caused by neglect ? ie driver error..

[gelda]

Some years ago my brother was parked on double yellow lines and a car hit him from behind, my brother's car was a write off, it turned out that the other driver wasn't insured so my brother couldn't claim off his insurance, my brother then put in a claim to his own insurance company but they wouldn't pay out because he was parked illegally,

[chas2008]

times have changed, insurers are more interested in keeping customers happy than rejecting claims..i have seen claims go through where the vehicle has had bald tyres...and they still paid out, just requested that the owner replaced them..

[Ethel]

gelda - was his insurance fully comp or third party?

[vikks99]

chas2008 - it was interesting reading your comments, especially about the part where the insurance company wants to keep the customer happy. With my friends company it would appear to be the opposite - they actually challenged him on his version of events and suggested that perhaps he didn't see the door was already open. They warned him that he would have to swear under oath that his version is the correct one. It now seems to come down to it's his word against the third party. My friend is now of course worried, that if even his own insurance company don't back him what chance has he in court! He is also worried that he will be liable for court costs should he lose. It was such a freak thing to happen, normally doors are opened onto sides of cars, but this caught the front bumper of the car. The fact is I know my friend is telling the truth because I saw the third party open his door, but I can't be counted as an independent witness even if I was driving a different vehicle.

[vikks99]

gelda - thank you for your comments - it was also interesting, as what happened to your brother is what I originally thought - that of you have an accident while parked illegally then your are not covered. However it would seem from all the posts that times have changed now and some insurers take no notice of this fact.

[chas2008]

interesting to know which ins co, we see plenty of claims that are so dubious its scary, we would love to seem them thrown out but the engineers refuse to argue with the insured, there excuse is they cant prove otherwise..
many accidents come down to one persons word against another..not much you can do about that., its also unusual for a claim to end up in court.

[t-mids]

vikks99,

you say that you can't be used as a witness ? just a bit confused here, are you not already classed as an independent witness as you were not in your friends car at the time of the accident???

[vikks99]

chas2008 - this is a very well known ins/comp - my friend has been with this particular comp for apprx 6 years and never claimed - he has been driving for 33 years.

When my friend reported the accident to his ins/comp the assistant, who had all the details said it had come up as a no fault claim, so my friend didn't have to pay any excess. A few days later the cheque came and he thought what a prompt efficient service! About 4/5 weeks later the ins/comp contacted my friend just to update him on the fact they were waiting for a reply from the other side because apparently the third party had not contacted his insurers. That was about 4 weeks ago. Then in a phone call two days ago came the news that the third party was contesting the claim because the car door was already open. My friend was then informed that it was now a matter for the courts.

[vikks99]

t-mids - I have actually argued the fact that I could be independant because I was driving my own car, but apparently because I am a personal friend of the driver involved, I am not impartial and would not be classed as an independant witness. As I said in a previous thread - we don't know where the 3rd party witnesses came from because there were only us in the street at the time. In fact my friends insurers told him that they were going to ignore one of the 3rd party witnesses because he didn't actually see the accident! So what is he a witness to? It doesn't make sense.

The sad thing is I had just taken my friend to the MOT testing station where his car had passed with flying colours, and he was on his way home.

[chas2008]

still confused over the court bit, most claims are contested one way or the other, everyone blames the other driver, just human nature..If all contested claims ended in court they would never cope with it.. I can honestly say i have never known a policy holder ending up in court over a contested claim..thats what we pay for with our premiums. If it was originaly a non fault claim i am asuming your friend is fully com. which is even a lesser reason to end up in court...

[vikks99]

chas2008

Hi again - yes my friend is fully comp. We thought the same as you, if every contested case went to court, the courts would be full.

He is waiting for copies of all the paperwork to be sent, so perhaps we will have a better idea then.

[chas2008]

does seem some strange issues in this one...all we can do is wait an see..

[vikks99]

Hi - a new development in the dispute. On Saturday my friend received a letter and paperwork from the loan car company that his ins comp arranged a courtesy vehicle from. They state that they have received a letter from the 3rd party's ins comp notifying them of the dispute regarding the claim.

The loan car company enclosed copies of the 3rd partys witness statements and asked for my friends comments............................ now I may be wrong here and this is why I'm asking............. what right has the loan company, if any to receive/request information regarding the accident? Surely a loan company is just that - it is employed by the ins comp to provide alternate transport. Thanks for your comments