rudds1 Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 not seen the story before I posted so don't know the ins and outs of it so if the car belonged to him and he had a crash the onus is on him In report police said there was stuff in car which pointed to car being his not his parents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 In report police said there was stuff in car which pointed to car being his not his parents and if he had insured it properly his family wouldn't have lost their home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaeldyn Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 If you was the victim and have life changing injuries. Would yiu be happy with £20 amonth. They should jail the family for being so stupid after they sold everything they owe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Could just be a bit of propaganda designed to discourage people from fronting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudds1 Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 Could just be a bit of propaganda designed to discourage people from fronting. Lets hope it works to discourage others in future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelle-82 Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Could just be a bit of propaganda designed to discourage people from fronting. That did cross my mind in all honesty! Personally i think the the family losing their home is extremely harsh punishment but i do agree that the parents should be punished, after all the mother is the named driver but HER CHILD caused a crash.. It was irresponsible of the parents to not insure the car properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 And to allow him to drive it if the story is true. You can't be fronting without complicity from 2 parties basically. But we have nothing other than a story told by a police officer to verify that this is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Is this these story about a guy who had his car insured in his mother's name and had a crash, seriously injuring the other party? The person injured sued and as the driver had invalid insurance and had committed insurance fraud with his mother, they are liable personally and so are forced to sell their house to pay the compensation. If so, No, this is not too harsh, the driver was at fault and was committing insurance fraud.They deserve everything they get and lets hope they are an example to anyone else thinking of doing the same. ---------- Post added 23-05-2016 at 15:54 ---------- EDIT: I assume the OP is referring to this: Sheffield family lost their home after son crashed uninsured car In one case in Sheffield a family lost their house because a man was driving around in a car for which his mum was down as the main driver. He was involved in an accident in which someone was severely injured and the family ended up paying out ‘hundreds of thousands of pounds’ in compensation, which cost them their house. http://www.thestar.co.uk/our-towns-and-cities/sheffield/sheffield-family-lost-their-home-after-son-crashed-uninsured-car-1-7923934 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bloke Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 It's obvious that the parents have had to sell their house to pay for the compensation against their son, in other words, bailing them out as he had no way of doing so himself. I assume they would have done the same regardless of them being silly enough to be implicit in his insurance fraud. When I was 17, it was common for parents to have kids as named drivers on parents' second cars for shared use of the car and give them experience without them owning their own car (and lower insurance premiums). There must have been some concrete evidence to show that this 'sharing' wasn't the case and it was just a scam to save money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelle-82 Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 If you was the victim and have life changing injuries. Would yiu be happy with £20 amonth. They should jail the family for being so stupid after they sold everything they owe How would it work then if it had happened to family that didnt own a property? Let's say it happened to a family living in a council house! How would they pay 'hundreds of thousands' of pounds out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now