Ridiculous Insurance for EX drink driving offender

[Alexanderegrt]

Hi guys, I think this thread ain't exactly the correct place to post my question since the topic is slightly different, but I've searched the entire forum and am unable to find one that is more similar. Just hope that someone may know a thing or two regarding the issue that's been bothering me.

 

I know it's pretty much in the public knowledge that insurance will not cover drink driving, but what does that mean exactly? I have read through my dad's vehicle insurance policy and found the implied meaning contained within that insurance will only NOT reimburse damages incurred by the driver in the event that the driver was drink driving. Which means that if a John Doe was drink driving and he smashed his car into a tree and got injured, his vehicle insurance will not pay for his medical bills, vehicle repair costs etc. That much is pretty straightforward.

 

But what happens if John Doe was drink driving and he knocked someone down instead? Let's say John got off the accident without suffering any injuries but the victim got admitted to the hospital. I know it's required by law for the insurance to pay for the victim's damages, but will the insurance be able to claim the compensated amount back from John? There is nothing within my dad's insurance policy that say anything about this, all it said is that it will not cover for the damages incurred by the insured himself in the case of drink driving. I hope that you guys can help me out on this...

 

 

[Tripleh]

*deleted. double post*

Edited December 31, 2012 by Tripleh

[Tripleh]

It is compulsory by law that an insurance company needs to pay third-party death and bodily injury. If the insured is in breach of a policy exclusion, the insurance company will still be obliged to pay the victim and then seek indemnity from the insured (whether Insurance company can get the full amount from the insured person is immaterial).If it is just property damage, the insurance company will not pay and the victim has to go after the culprit directly.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Tripleh

[Blackyv]

Hi guys, I think this thread ain't exactly the correct place to post my question since the topic is slightly different, but I've searched the entire forum and am unable to find one that is more similar. Just hope that someone may know a thing or two regarding the issue that's been bothering me.

 

I know it's pretty much in the public knowledge that insurance will not cover drink driving, but what does that mean exactly? I have read through my dad's vehicle insurance policy and found the implied meaning contained within that insurance will only NOT reimburse damages incurred by the driver in the event that the driver was drink driving. Which means that if a John Doe was drink driving and he smashed his car into a tree and got injured, his vehicle insurance will not pay for his medical bills, vehicle repair costs etc. That much is pretty straightforward.

 

But what happens if John Doe was drink driving and he knocked someone down instead? Let's say John got off the accident without suffering any injuries but the victim got admitted to the hospital. I know it's required by law for the insurance to pay for the victim's damages, but will the insurance be able to claim the compensated amount back from John? There is nothing within my dad's insurance policy that say anything about this, all it said is that it will not cover for the damages incurred by the insured himself in the case of drink driving. I hope that you guys can help me out on this...

 

Your insurer will pay all their medical claim and repair then sue you to recover all the cost.. you r screwed and I think you should be....

[Kennnny]

It's not fair. It is just Correct.

[Alexanderegrt]

If the insured is in breach of a policy exclusion, the insurance company will still be obliged to pay the victim and then seek indemnity from the insured (whether Insurance company can get the full amount from the insured person is immaterial)

 

That's the thing exactly, given the circumstances as described by my first post, will that be considered a breach of the policy exclusion? They can seek indemnity from the insured but as far as the terms and conditions of the insurance policy may apply, will they usually be successful in such attempts?