Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Appeal ruling possibly muddies term 'use' of vehicle?

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

arry
Super Spammer



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:59 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Appeal ruling possibly muddies term 'use' of vehicle? Reply with quote

https://www.insurancetimes.co.uk/court-rules-motor-insurer-liable-for-factory-fire/1421447.article

paraphrasing Insurance Times wrote:
Thomas Holden had asked his bosses Phoenix Engineering if he could use the firm's loading bay to work on his car.

He put the car on its side so that he could weld a metal plate under the driving seat.

He stood up to see flames licking the inside of the car. Destroyed factory and adjoining premises.

Property insurer AXA sued motor insurer, Churchill.

Original judge dismissed AXA's claim that the basis Mr Holden was not USING his vehicle as a car when the fire broke out. The car was on its side with battery disconnected.

Court of appeal found he had made an error of principle.

Mr Holden's policy stated that he was only covered if he was actually in the car when the loss arose. But Master of the Roolls said that did not provide the minimum third party cover required by RTA98.

What Mr Holden was doing with his car was entirely commonplace and qualified as as a "use" of the vehicle, ruled the judge


Still trying to get my head around this one TBH but definitely going to get Roger a bit fired up Laughing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:32 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fired up, ho ho.

Many years ago, my first car caught fire in the stuuuudent union car park and burned out its engine bay. Totally not down to the loose fuel pipe that I definitely wasn't completely aware of. I wasn't even in it at the time, it just spontaneously combusted some time after driving it.

Fortunately it didn't damage anything else or kill any kittehs, but I always wondered how the liability and indemnity would have worked out if it had.

I guess now I know.

With this, the Discount Rate shenanigans, and with Vnuk still to be implemented, it's like a perfect storm for premiums.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

UnknownStuntm...
World Chat Champion



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:31 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Re: Appeal ruling possibly muddies term 'use' of vehicle? Reply with quote

paraphrasing Insurance Times wrote:
Phoenix Engineering

Just keeps giving
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

stinkwheel
Bovine Proctologist



Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:01 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

I always thought the fire part of the insurance was a seperate "thing"?
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Fizzoid
World Chat Champion



Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:37 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm, so should your car's handbrake fail, roll down a hill (while you're not in it) and cause damage, they wouldn't be able to claim off your insurance for 3rd party damage because you weren't using your car?
____________________
Rogerborg wrote: It'd certainly make it easier to ego-find my own posts on pages, given the number of fags (gay like traps) who insist on putting my name in their .sig
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:43 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's the example I've always seen given of why vehicles need 3rd party indemnity in any place accessible by the public, whether you're actually in them or not.

After all, if you'd left the handbrake off or if it failed due to an avoidable lack of maintenance, you'd be personally liable, so you'd really want indemnity.

Somewhat less persuasive is the example of a bike in your driveway spontaneously falling on a postman / chugger / waif, which is less likely to be blameworthy. You can bet they'd still claim against you though.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Nobby the Bastard
Harley Gaydar



Joined: 16 Aug 2013
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:42 - 04 May 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:
Fired up, ho ho.

Many years ago, my first car caught fire in the stuuuudent union car park and burned out its engine bay. Totally not down to the loose fuel pipe that I definitely wasn't completely aware of. I wasn't even in it at the time, it just spontaneously combusted some time after driving it.

Fortunately it didn't damage anything else or kill any kittehs, but I always wondered how the liability and indemnity would have worked out if it had.

I guess now I know.

With this, the Discount Rate shenanigans, and with Vnuk still to be implemented, it's like a perfect storm for premiums.


Funnily enough, we did discounting at accountants training school yesterday. Turns out I was right and a 3 mil bill wouldn't end up at a 10 mil one....
____________________
trevor saxe-coburg-gotha:"Remember this simple rule - scooters are for men who like to feel the breeze on their huge, flapping cunt lips."
Sprint ST 1050
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 6 years, 351 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.10 Sec - Server Load: 0.4 - MySQL Queries: 18 - Page Size: 56.78 Kb