Personal injury: Untraced drivers and rights – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted July 26th, 2017 in costs, limitations, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, news, personal injuries by sally

‘In Howe v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2017] EWCA obligation 932, Mr Howe was driving a lorry in France on 30 March 2007 when a wheel detached from a lorry in front of him. The resulting accident left him paraplegic. Neither the other vehicle nor its driver was ever traced. He submitted a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau and its French equivalent, but after a time he was told by the French that his claim was out of time. Consequently, he issued proceedings against the British MIB directly, seeking to enforce his rights under regulation 13 of the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 (the regulations). That claim was struck out because it was out of time. The MIB now sought to recover its costs of defending the proceedings.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 24th July 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

New MIB Untraced and Uninsured Drivers Agreements – Zenith PI Blog

‘The new agreements come into force for accidents occurring after 1 March 2017. They were published on 13 January 2017 with the following statement:

MIB paying a claim for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car when it has been caused by another uninsured or a ‘hit and run’ driver seems counter-intuitive. However, from 1 March 2017 that is what MIB will be required to do.

Paul Ryman-Tubb, Chief Technical Officer at MIB said: “Whilst we will deal with these claims in a professional manner, the principle of using honest premium paying motorists money to pay for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car seems crazy.”’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st February 2017

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

New Untraced Drivers Agreement in force after 1st March 2017 – Park Square Barristers

‘If an injured person cannot identify the fault driver of another vehicle, this is the agreement which governs their rights to compensation. In many instances, this is because the accident was a classic “hit and run”; indeed the MIB have stated that 12% of accidents in which the accident was reported to the police and a person was injured were such “hit and run accidents”. (That statistic is not as significant as it would seem at first blush; the majority of relatively minor road traffic accidents are not reported to police; the reason that such accidents are reported is that the other vehicle has made off without stopping so to a certain extent it is a self-selecting criteria). No details of the fault vehicle or the driver tend to have been obtained or recorded so an injured person’s only option would be the Untraced Driver’s Agreement.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 8th February 2017

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Insurance surgery: English drama or Greek tragedy? – New Law Journal

‘Peter Allchorne translates the message from Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau for motor accident victims.’

Full story

New Law Journal, 17th August 2016

Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk

MIB hails Supreme Court ruling over damages for overseas accidents – Litigation Futures

‘The Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) has welcomed the clarity provided today by a Supreme Court ruling that damages for a UK resident badly injured by an uninsured driver in Greece should be assessed under Greek law.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 3rd August 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Liability of the MIB for Insolvent Insurers – Park Square Barristers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, insolvency, insurance, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, news by sally

‘Caroline Wood considers the recent Court of Appeal decision concerning the liability of the MIB where an insurer has become insolvent.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 3rd June 2016

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

NEW UNINSURED DRIVERS’ AGREEMENT – IN FORCE 1 AUGUST 2015 – Zenith PI

‘A new Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement comes into force on 1 August 2015 which applies to accidents occurring on or after that date.’

Full story

Zenith PI, 13th July 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau – WLR Daily

Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2015] EWHC 1002 (QB); [2015] WLR (D) 177

‘The scope of the defendant’s liability to the claimant under regulation 13(2) of the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 was to be determined in accordance with the law of England and Wales and not the law of the country where the accident occurred.’

WLR Daily, 17th April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Byrne v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another – Times Law Reports

Posted July 2nd, 2008 in EC law, law reports, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, time limits by sally

Byrne v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another

Court of Appeal

“The procedure for making a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation in respect of injury caused by an untraced driver should be subject to a limitation period no less favourable than that which applied to the commencement of proceedings by minors for personal injury in tort against a traced driver.”

The Times, 2nd July 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another – Times Law Reports

Posted June 15th, 2007 in EC law, law reports, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, time limits by sally

UK in breach of uninsured drivers’ duty 

Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau and Another

Queen’s Bench Division

“Failure by the United Kingdom to comply with the Second European Directive on motor insurance rendered it liable in damages.”

The Times, 15th June 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau – WLR Daily

Posted June 8th, 2007 in EC law, law reports, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, time limits by sally

Byrne v. Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2007] EWHC 1268 (QB)

The procedure for making a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation in respect of injury caused by an untraced driver under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972, which procedure was relied on by the United Kingdom as implementing art 1(4) of Council Directive 84/5/EEC, should be subject to a limitation period no less favourable than that which applied under s 28 of the Limitation Act 1980 to the commencement of proceedings by minors for personal injury in tort against a traced driver. Because the three-year time limit for the bringing of a claim under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972 was not compliant with art 1(4) of the Directive, which was capable of having direct effect, the United Kingdom was in sufficiently serious breach of its Community law obligations to give rise in principle to a liability for damages.”

WLR Daily, 7th June 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.