bud bumped a bakkie without licence

[jakes978]

Hi guys

one of my gaming buds who stay in the lower NW just told me he doesn't have a licence and that he bumped a bakkie slightly yesterday. The bakkie has insurance and the owner wants to get the money from him for his excess fee which luckily isnt much at all. They went to the station to fill out an AR and he told the officer that he will return for the fine but hasn't gone yet as he has to get money first.

I wana know what happens:

if he does pay the fine, does it stay on his name when he wants to actually do his learners ?

he is $%^ scared , should he just leave it and book his learners ASAP ?

is he going to have to produce his licence (which he doesnt have) when paying the fine ? or could he just phone and get a notice number and pay it online like speed fines ?

some people just need a good klap from the left

 

[HideInLight]

Nvm the licence.
He doesn't even have his learners?

Time to face the consequences.

 

[Alton Turner Blackwood]

Your friend, eh?

 

[jakes978]

yup i got referred by him to this place to get some advice on the situation . its a pretty prickly thing

 

[xrapidx]

Did he get a fine?

EDIT: And I'd be more worried about the insurance - he must not pay the guys excess - because the insurance are going to come after him for the full amount.

 

[Draconia2]

Nvm the licence.
He doesn't even have his learners?

Time to face the consequences.

So whats gonna happen with this oke now ? gets popcorn

 

[zululami]

I don't understand, what is the fine for? The excess or a separate fine by SAPS for driving without a licence? The fine for driving without a valid driving licence is about R1200 under the current AARTO legislation.

Operating a vehicle without possessing a valid driving licence is not currently a criminal offence, but the AARTO regulations are to be amended imminently to re-classify this offence as a criminal offence for which one can be arrested, detained and criminally charged - So, by paying the fine, looks like your buddy is off the hook...

He will notice this because they will not take his finger prints for this!

 

[AstroTurf]

Nothing criminal.

May have to pay excess then later the insurance may sue him for the damages.

 

[Slootvreter]

just told me he doesn't have a licence

Ooooh the righteous MyBB hode will burn him for this!

 

[GreGorGy]

No license? If the AR reflects this the insurers will sue him for the cost of the repair as well as the excess which he will then have to pay. Again. He needs to realise that he can end up paying twice. In fact pro tip for anyone: never offer to pay the excess. You will be sued for it in good time

 

[zululami]

No license? If the AR reflects this the insurers will sue him for the cost of the repair as well as the excess which he will then have to pay. Again. He needs to realise that he can end up paying twice. In fact pro tip for anyone: never offer to pay the excess. You will be sued for it in good time

What should you do then if you're at fault and you don't have insurance ... or even a licence in this case... run?

 

[jakes978]

ok so i phoned the bloke now, he said the insurance contacted him today and asked what happened and that was that. Yes the fine was separate by SAPS.

GregorGy - so even though the guy with insurance had made arrangements with the culprit to get everything sorted , the insurance will later on sue for damages ?

 

[Draconia2]

you know when the toilet paper is finished and you just had a runny stomach ....... so you find a rug .... a rough one

 

[GreGorGy]

What should you do then if you're at fault and you don't have insurance ... or even a licence in this case... run?

No - do what you would ordinarily do. If you are at fault, the insurers will sue you and prove it in court. You can of course admit to fault beforehand if you don't want to go to court. Insurers are not there to pay for the other party's mistakes. Their job is to cover the risk to their customer. After that fact, they reserve the right to recuperate their losses by taking action against the other party, if s/he is responsible on the balance of things. If that third party has their own insurance, the companies usually offset things between themselves. If not, he gets sued.

If you are at fault and pay the guy's excess, you have no guarantee that when it goes to court and a decision is made that said payment will be taken into consideration as there is no way of indicating it was for the event that caused the loss.

GregorGy - so even though the guy with insurance had made arrangements with the culprit to get everything sorted , the insurance will later on sue for damages ?

Not necessarily WILL but most likely, yes - their contracts almost always state this too, that the insured may not prejudice their right to recover their losses.

 

[Kosmik]

ok so i phoned the bloke now, he said the insurance contacted him today and asked what happened and that was that. Yes the fine was separate by SAPS.

GregorGy - so even though the guy with insurance had made arrangements with the culprit to get everything sorted , the insurance will later on sue for damages ?

Yes. It is illegal for the owner to recoup the excess, that is why he has insurance.

 

[Salvage]

so even though the guy with insurance had made arrangements with the culprit to get everything sorted , the insurance will later on sue for damages ?

At the end of the day, The insurers have suffered a loss (having to pay out to repair the insured's car) due to someone who operated a vehicle without a valid drivers license. They won't look too kindly on that, so they may very well decide to sue to try recurperate their costs. It's an option they have available.

It's pretty much standard process for Insurers to follow that route if the other party admits fault in an accident. They'll try get their costs back from the guilty party's insurance. And if the guilty party doesn't have insurance, they'll try get it back from the individual directly.

 

[Wyzak]

What an ass, I hope your 'bud' gets arrested and prosecuted for driving without a license.

 

[Draconia2]

No - do what you would ordinarily do. If you are at fault, the insurers will sue you and prove it in court. You can of course admit to fault beforehand if you don't want to go to court. Insurers are not there to pay for the other party's mistakes. Their job is to cover the risk to their customer. After that fact, they reserve the right to recuperate their losses by taking action against the other party, if s/he is responsible on the balance of things. If that third party has their own insurance, the companies usually offset things between themselves. If not, he gets sued.

If you are at fault and pay the guy's excess, you have no guarantee that when it goes to court and a decision is made that said payment will be taken into consideration as there is no way of indicating it was for the event that caused the loss.




Not necessarily WILL but most likely, yes - their contracts almost always state this too, that the insured may not prejudice their right to recover their losses.

surely a proof of payment will suffice ? because the excess was already covered and paid off. then that just leaves the repair cost ?

 

[jakes978]

Should he then rather contact the insurance and use the REF nr he got from the guy , and ask what will happen now ? because he and the driver have made arrangements already to get the excess money sorted and to find out if the insurance actually knows about this arrangement so he does not have to pay twice ?

 

[GreGorGy]

It's pretty much standard process for Insurers to follow that route if the other party admits fault in an accident. They'll try get their costs back from the guilty party's insurance. And if the guilty party doesn't have insurance, they'll try get it back from the individual directly.

Sadly, many people think it just ends when the insurers pay for the repair. Not by a long shot. And here's the catch: when a driver is not at fault but mitigating circumstances swing things against him (no license, drunk, texting, whatever) and he offers to settle the excess, he puts himself in line for MORE butthurt, not less, as that tacit admission of responsibility crumbles any defence he may have later ("I may have been texting but the other driver jumped the robot" for example.)