Author Topic: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers  (Read 10579 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DaveR

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2944
  • Thanked: 177 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Grumpy Old Man in Training
A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« on: February 15, 2014, 05:21:33 PM »
OK, I know, I should be on a camp chair somewhere chillin.
Anyway, this came up in a discussion a while ago, and I am most curious to see what you clever swaggers think.

Situation is this.
Pretend for a moment, I am in the wife’s Jackaroo, at the lights, everything legal as far as vehicle road worthy and my capacity to drive.
Suddenly, a flash big 200 series L/C runs into the back, shunts me into a pole.
The Jackaroo is a write of, blind Freedy would see that, but the L/C has minor damage. Plenty of witnesses, even a coper having lunch near by.

Now the insurance would pay out $9,000 for the Jackaroo, but, with all the messing about you go through for a car purchase, it costs $10,000 to get another Jackaroo.
Remember this is pretend.

Now the big question.
Do I have a right to take into my possession the 200 L/C (regardless of who or what entity owns it) as security until I am properly reimbursed for another vehicle? Equal value of course.
Do I have to submit a claim with my Insurer? Can I just notify them of the vehicles condition and say that a commercial – private agreement is pending.
Can I lodge a claim against the other driver for suitable payment etc.

I realise it depends upon the assets of the other driver, so with someone driving a Hyundai Excel, well, I’d be calling the insurance folk, but a nice Range Rover Sports and so on, why not.
Is it feasible?

Like I said, I do need more camp chair time…….
2001 HDJ-100, a flash one
2013 Expanda OB

Offline Bird

  • Once Was Lost, now am found
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Thanked: 1833 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Life is far too long....
    • My Place.
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2014, 05:24:22 PM »
Quote from: DaveR
Now the big question.
Do I have a right to take into my possession the 200 L/C (regardless of who or what entity owns it) as security until I am properly reimbursed for another vehicle? Equal value of course.
is this a serious question?? No, your not allowed to.
 Good luck taking the blokes 100k car off him, you might wear one on the sniffer I'd suggest..


Quote
Do I have to submit a claim with my Insurer? Can I just notify them of the vehicles condition and say that a commercial – private agreement is pending.
its a not at fault claim, so I'd tell them

Quote
Can I lodge a claim against the other driver for suitable payment etc.
if you don't claim against him, his insurance company isn't going to know about it and pay up
-
Click to enlarge

Gone to a new home

Offline DaveR

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2944
  • Thanked: 177 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Grumpy Old Man in Training
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2014, 05:30:25 PM »
is this a serious question??
Sure is.

No, your not allowed to.

Why not, it is only security until such time as payment is made. That is payment for all expenses incured to replace like for like vehicle and any other property.
When we spoke about it, an argument was put forward that it could be stated that a contract of my terms was entered into the moment the collision occurred. That contract would be unreasonable if I was saying you now owe me a 200 series, but the $10,000 is fair.
2001 HDJ-100, a flash one
2013 Expanda OB

Offline Bird

  • Once Was Lost, now am found
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Thanked: 1833 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Life is far too long....
    • My Place.
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2014, 05:36:23 PM »
-
Click to enlarge

Gone to a new home

Offline Tim - Stratford

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 1639
  • Thanked: 76 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Sarah's Canvas Products
    • Canvas Jaffle Iron Covers
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2014, 05:39:56 PM »
Why wouldn't you just ask your insurance company for a better pay out? A mate's wife stacked his car which he was fastidious about. You wouldn't find a bettervexample with low kays etc. Insurance wrote it off and offered him $8k. He hunted through car sales, magazines, classifieds etc and proved to them it was worth more. He ended up with over $10k.

As for taking the LC - opens a whole new can of worms. You could be liable to arrest for theft of motor vehicle (may not get charged) loss of earnings if it is a company car etc - grief you probably don't need.

Your 'contract' would most likely be between you and your insurer or the insurer of the 200.

My 2c

Tim

Sarah's Canvas Products...
http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=30053.0

Offline JCOJ

  • 2019 National Meet Volunteer
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
  • Thanked: 73 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2014, 05:40:52 PM »
You cannot take possession of his LC200 - it is his vehicle and is registered in his name - not yours.

You have insurance for a reason - and that is to protect you and your assets.  Leave it to your insurance company to make the agreements and get the money off him (his insurance company) - and that is why he has insurance too.

He hypothetically ran into the back of you - it was a hypothetical accident.  If going by your scenario, you then held his $100k LC200 and then it got damaged in your care to the tune of $20,000, can he then come with his sleeping bag and stay at your house???

Offline DaveR

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2944
  • Thanked: 177 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Grumpy Old Man in Training
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2014, 05:41:14 PM »



Humm.
OK, I can take the hint.
I'll just go and jump in the pool now.
2001 HDJ-100, a flash one
2013 Expanda OB

Offline Malcolm Tugless

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
  • Thanked: 14 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Are we there yet ?
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2014, 05:44:28 PM »
Don't think you can just take someones car as a holding deposit.

Why would the other driver offer to buy you another car or give you money, when they would more than likely claim it on insurance and simply pay any excess.

Of course you would notify your insurance provider, you're not at fault. Why wouldn't you.

If the vehicle is written off, you would be paid the agreed value. Nothing more, nothing less. Its a contractual agreement, quite straight forward really.

There is no contract of my terms entered into the moment a collision occurs. There is the liability of fault, but that is worn by the insurer. Unless the driver at fault is deemed to be uninsured. At this point, your insurer would pay you out and then pursue the other party to recoup funds.


Offline Patr80l

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 1682
  • Thanked: 38 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2014, 05:47:54 PM »
It's a civil matter between you and the LC driver.   Seizing property is what the Sheriff does, on Court orders.
If you have a "current market value"  policy and you don't want to be left short, then pay more and take out an Agreed Value policy.
And one of the services your insurer will provide is dealing with the other driver.


« Last Edit: February 15, 2014, 06:10:23 PM by Patr80l »
40, 80, GU, Touareg, GU, Touareg, 200

Offline DannyG

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 3326
  • Thanked: 122 times
  • Gender: Male
  • The best way to predict the future is to create it
    • Oz Isuzu Forum
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2014, 06:19:51 PM »



Lol sometimes this place cracks me up!
Not a virus, not a re-install, not a format, not an issue since 2011..once you go mac you never go back

Oz Isuzu Forums
My Trailer Build

Offline GeoffA

  • 2017 National Meet Volunteer
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 8472
  • Thanked: 603 times
  • Gender: Male
  • "If 1 axle is good, 2 must be better........."
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2014, 06:25:58 PM »
.......
Do I have a right to take into my possession the 200 L/C......

Interested to know how you propose to do that.
I know how I'd react if it was tried on me.....
Geoff and Kay

1999 GU TD42T wagon
2005 Coota Camper - gone, but never forgotten
2020 North Coast 15' Titanium - tandem, of course

Land Cruiser.....the Patrol that Toyota try to build.....

Offline achjimmy

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 3254
  • Thanked: 165 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #11 on: February 15, 2014, 06:39:36 PM »
Yep no right on his property. But you have an entitlement to fair recourse. You do not have to lodge a claim with your insurance company or deal with his. You have resonable right to compensation. If you can reasonably prove it will cost $10 or $11 k to replace or repair your vehicle you can proceed and claim that of him. Of course his insurance will contact you and argue, if they will not agree to pay you the resonable value you continue to claim on him. End of the day he has to recompense you. Bit of a dragged out senario for the sake of a grand but if it floats your boat Dave do it. My dad did and the NRMA backed down and paid him out every cent.
Here for a good time, not a long time!

Jim

Offline achjimmy

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 3254
  • Thanked: 165 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2014, 06:41:59 PM »
Btw why do everybody think 200s are big?  Kia caniavals are bigger!  ;D
Here for a good time, not a long time!

Jim

Offline DaveR

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2944
  • Thanked: 177 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Grumpy Old Man in Training
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2014, 07:02:51 PM »
Thanks Swaggers.
OK, should have said the big new Horrible Looking Nissan instead, shame on me to bring L/C's into disrepute.
My position in the original discussion that turned into a full blown argument was to go and get a beer, slide my chair back and be amused by the whole thing.
But then I got wondering, what would happen if......
My knowledge of legal stuff is less then nil, although improving thanks to you lot.
At least now, next time it comes up, I can participate a bit, if I have a computer handy, and quote you lot.....  ;D
2001 HDJ-100, a flash one
2013 Expanda OB

Offline achjimmy

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 3254
  • Thanked: 165 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2014, 07:41:01 PM »
Thanks Swaggers.
OK, should have said the big new Horrible Looking Nissan instead, shame on me to bring L/C's into disrepute.
My position in the original discussion that turned into a full blown argument was to go and get a beer, slide my chair back and be amused by the whole thing.
But then I got wondering, what would happen if......
My knowledge of legal stuff is less then nil, although improving thanks to you lot.
At least now, next time it comes up, I can participate a bit, if I have a computer handy, and quote you lot.....  ;D

If it was a Nissan why would you want to seize his vehicle ?  >:D >:D >:D
Here for a good time, not a long time!

Jim

Offline l0ckym

  • Sleeping Bag User
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2014, 09:17:01 PM »
As others have said, you can't have his stuff for 'security'..

Just for a laugh, try it....make sure you take photo's..it'd be the funniest thing we've seen this year....


Basically, as described, its against the law....completely.....not just theft, loss of earnings, intimidatory behaviour, but also fraud...

If you get pinged for all those...try getting insurance ever again...

Then you will need bikies...lots of bikies...if your wife dings the car... :D
2005 Nissan X-Trail ST
2008 Mountain Trail Camper

Offline Bird

  • Once Was Lost, now am found
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Thanked: 1833 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Life is far too long....
    • My Place.
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2014, 09:20:39 PM »
Quote from: DaveR
But then I got wondering, what would happen if......

-
Click to enlarge

Gone to a new home

Offline TOPNDR

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 674
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2014, 09:41:29 PM »
If the market value of your vehicle is $9k, I can't see that you could claim $1k because a replacement vehicle cost $10k, short of a civil court case, which I suspect would be very costly and highly unlikely to succeed.
'09 VX TTD Cruiser:- 6 speed auto, 650 nm torque plus bling
'09 Australian Off Road Quantum

Offline rossm

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • Thanked: 55 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2014, 09:58:44 PM »
If the market value of your vehicle is $9k, I can't see that you could claim $1k because a replacement vehicle cost $10k, short of a civil court case, which I suspect would be very costly and highly unlikely to succeed.
But I bet you could find a lawyer who would tell you that you have a very good case and a good chance of winning ... As they always so.
the lawyers never lose.

Offline Jeepers Creepers

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 6631
  • Thanked: 431 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2014, 01:50:18 PM »
This thread is proof, you shouldn't partake in strong drink whilst in charge of your car keys or keyboard.

Joke for ya.....

How do ya stop DaveR from drowning in his pool?

Ya take ya foot off his head.....  ;D Just joking, honest.

Lost, get ya foot of his head.
I DON'T CARE HOW NICE THE HAND SOAP SMELLS.....

You should never walk out of the public toilets sniffing your fingers.

Offline oldmate

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Thanked: 1311 times
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2014, 02:02:48 PM »
This thread is proof, you shouldn't partake in strong drink whilst in charge of your car keys or keyboard.

Joke for ya.....

How do ya stop DaveR from drowning in his pool?

Ya take ya foot off his head.....  ;D Just joking, honest.

Lost, get ya foot of his head.


Hahahahaha hahahaha pick myself off the floor. Oh look didn't spill a drop  ;D ;D
Our Blog. A work in progress
https://www.facebook.com/UltimateAdventuresBlog/

Offline dazzler

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 5104
  • Thanked: 40 times
  • Power Power Power
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2014, 04:02:59 PM »

Now the big question.
1. Do I have a right to take into my possession the 200 L/C (regardless of who or what entity owns it) as security until I am properly reimbursed for another vehicle? Equal value of course.
2. Do I have to submit a claim with my Insurer? Can I just notify them of the vehicles condition and say that a commercial – private agreement is pending.
3. Can I lodge a claim against the other driver for suitable payment etc.



1. No.
2. You must notify your insurer as your vehicle is no longer what it says in the policy.  I have never seen a policy that says don't tell us.  You don't have to make a claim but must notify them.
3. No.  If you had business insurance or loss of income insurance you could claim against that if indeed you lost income as a result of the collision. 

Thats $489.55 in legal advice.  Round it down to two cases of Boags.   :cheers:
My alternative to cheap import trailers;

http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=36094.msg578367#msg578367


Offline dazzler

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 5104
  • Thanked: 40 times
  • Power Power Power
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2014, 04:05:13 PM »
Interested to know how you propose to do that.
I know how I'd react if it was tried on me.....

This reminds me of the truckies blockade at parliament house.  A few of us were the first ones up there when it started and one of the bosses was on the radio demanding and ordering that we take possession of the trucks and remove them.   :police:

What could possibly go wrong  8)
My alternative to cheap import trailers;

http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=36094.msg578367#msg578367


Offline oldmate

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Thanked: 1311 times
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2014, 05:31:39 PM »
This reminds me of the truckies blockade at parliament house.  A few of us were the first ones up there when it started and one of the bosses was on the radio demanding and ordering that we take possession of the trucks and remove them.   :police:

What could possibly go wrong  8)

 :cup:  gold
Our Blog. A work in progress
https://www.facebook.com/UltimateAdventuresBlog/

Offline evans52

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: A theoretical legal question for you clever swaggers
« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2014, 06:06:15 PM »

Of course you would notify your insurance provider, you're not at fault. Why wouldn't you.

If the vehicle is written off, you would be paid the agreed value. Nothing more, nothing less. Its a contractual agreement, quite straight forward really.



If the Third Party vehicle has Insurance, you don't necessarily need to involve you're own Insurer. You can "claim" straight through the Third Party. No excess to pay and it's not recorded as a claim against yourself. Therefore, it CAN go towards having a cheaper premium the following renewal. It's a gamble though, because an Insurer of Third Party has the right to do two things when settling your claim:

1. Not pay a cent to you until their Client has paid their excess.
2. Settle your claim, less their Client's excess. The only way to recouple that lost $400 excess or what ever, is to pursue the Third Party directly.


Insurance would only pay the Agreed Value if you pay for it on the Policy. Some will do Market or Agreed Value which ever is higher also.