Insurance and non compliance with Best practice Guidelines

[Andy Clark]

I bet the car owner still got payed out.

 

Sort of...... but not how you'd think.

 

 

Anyone else??

[Mesterh]

Car got taken away and crushed, owner got a bit of money for it.

[Mr Ed]

Lack of tax or MOT does NOT mean a car is uninsured.

[Andy Clark]

Lack of tax or MOT does NOT mean a car is uninsured.

 

Well that's not what the police and his insurers said.

 

 

Anyway, to continue the story......

 

 

The car owner was prosecuted for no tax/MOT/ (insurance) etc.... £1000 fine, and a written off car.

 

 

He tried to claim against the boss, for the damage to the car, but the company insurance refused to pay out, as the chap up the tree was a subby and not a direct employee.

 

The subby had no insurance of his own, so no claim could be filled against him either....

 

 

The car owner then filled a private suit against the company, which the court upheld...... the company had to pay out for the car, plus costs and expenses.

[skyhuck]

Not surprised.

 

Being in breach of the law does NOT remove your rights.

 

If some one breaks into your house and is injured, they can sue you, even though they are committing a criminal act by being in you home.

[Mesterh]

He tried to claim against the boss, for the damage to the car, but the company insurance refused to pay out, as the chap up the tree was a subby and not a direct employee.

 

Thats the worst pat of all this, they should have paid up IMO or it goes against all the threads of freelance/subbies having PL etc.

 

Unless he was a 'true' subby of course.

[Jamie]

ok his car had no tax MOT etc but his car was still written off through damage caused by a huge lump of wood. If he'd been driving it and hit someone that would be a diferent matter.

 

the tree outfit were to blame, the climber was in control of his actions, he should have taken it smaller, if the 'boss' was on the ground he could only shout.

 

 

how many folk would know the exact in's and out's of their insurance contracts. bet the Ins companies could squirm out of quite a lot

 

Jamie

[Andy Clark]

the tree outfit were to blame, the climber was in control of his actions, he should have taken it smaller, if the 'boss' was on the ground he could only shout.

 

 

The climber and the "boss" had a 5 or maybe even 10 minute debate, about how to cut the branch...... the climber, airing on the side of smaller, but the boss insisting on "In One".

 

There were 4 or 5 groundsman on the job (seriously, it was a very big tree) who also heard their debate.

 

Ultimately, the boss was to blame, and it was he who paid the price, but the moral of the story has kinda been missed.........

 

 

The company insurance refused to pay, because the subby was not a direct employee, therefore not covered by company P/L insurance.

[skyhuck]

My insurers have always asked if I use subbys.

[Peter]

Subbies are covered if you want them to be covered, if the company doesnt have cover for using subbies then they shouldnt use them.