Hi All.
May car insurance PDS states under General Exclusions "The driver was under the influence of any ahcohol".
What does your policy state? Would it be okay to be within the legal limits?
Does Your Car Insurance Cover Driving within Legal Alcohol Limits?
rick5042 on 04/05/2022 - 20:06
Comments
Ok
Yes it is ok. Also okay drive within legal limits, each to their own.
I’ve had friends busted after one drink not thinking they are over so for me it’s not worth it.
Yes not worth drink & driving. To be honest not worth drink alcohol at larger quantities either, I'd say any more than twice a week is, a little too much
What was the 'one drink' a bottle of whisky?
@EightImmortals: lol - I guess I can only take their word for it, but one friend said she had a glass of wine after work on an empty stomach, got pulled over, tested over and actually got taken back to the station in a paddy wagon. Very nice professional woman who wouldn’t typically find herself in the back of a paddy wagon. She said she was mortified.
Then I reckon insurers will try and get out of any claims if there’s any suggestion that you may have been drinking, whether that is fair or not.
The other day I did have one very low alcohol beer 0.3 standard drinks (0.9%) then drive. But it’s honestly not worth the risk for me to have any more than that.
OP - So if you had your full licence and another driver collided into you and you blew 0.03, your insurance provider wouldn't honour a claim? Surely that cannot be legal.
AAMI:
Alcohol and/or drugs
an incident occurring when your car is being driven by, or is in the charge of, anyone who:
• was under the influence of, or had their judgement affected by, any alcohol and/or drugs and/or
medication;
• had more than the legal limit for alcohol and/or drugs in their breath, blood, saliva or urine as shown
by analysis;
• refused to take a test for alcohol and/or drugs and/or medication
That first point is so typical. Just the other day I listened to this NPR Planet Money podcast on insurance payout evasion - they are so untrustworthy and dirty.
Why so? It's a valid point. Do you want your pilot to fly the plain, if pilot was under the influence of, any alcohol and/or drugs and/or
medication; that may affect the judgement? In other words you shouldn't be driving if that the case.because it is super vague dude,
and technically they can made BS excuses like the person was under caffeine (caffeine is a drug), or person was second hand smoking in the car.
medication- what LoL my medication of keflex (common antibiotic) can now disqualify my insurance claim?Stupid excuses
You see the trend ?
It's BS excuse like this that they can technically make which shows their dirtiness, and as*holeness.
That's why its best to let these insurance companies go bankrupt, by not buying their services to begin with, with no capital they wont survive.
was under the influence of, or had their judgement affected
Do any of those affect your judgement and/or lead to impairment?
@USER DC: Insurance companies need to protect their ass.
But lets the role reversed, if someone had a serious accident against you and influence of, any. You probably sue their ass off for negligent driving and insurance company don't want to be in part of it.
Do you want your pilot to fly the plain
I do prefer them painted to plain. The fusilage is better protected.
Pilots fly plains every day when crop dusting in rural areas.
Surely if you had less than the legal limit then it's hard to prove that you were "under the influence"?
I investigated a claim for an insurer in which the driver was charged by SAPOL with DUI but not with PCA.
A patrol was following the insured vehicle which was being driven erratically.
The vehicle crashed. The driver blew
.03 roadside and .024 in the bus.
Claim denied by the insurer.
DUI and PCA are separate offences.
Yes
It's fine within the legal limits of your licence.
If you are under the legal limit, then the government considers that your driving is not sufficiently “influenced” to make it less safe, so it would be hard for your insurer to argue that it was.
Except if police charged the driver with DUI which is a separate offence to PCA.
In SA, a driver can be charged with DUI even if they blow under .05.
Conversely, you can be charged with PCA without being charged with DUI. It depends on the individual circumstances.
Poll?
Man I honestly love how when people seriously manage to get a reading more than 0, but within the legal limits. Technically its very hard to control this, for most people it is usually either binge drink, or dont drink at all.
I regularly attend the footy or see bands and have a few beers and drive home.
At the footy I'll have a beer when I get there and another at half time.
At a gig I'll grab a beer when I get there and another before the main band starts playing.
It's really not that hard to control.
but why even take risk of 1 beer then ? is the question
Surely if you can control your mind then dont have 1 at all either, it doesn't really make a difference in having 1 or 0 beers.
I mean socially its different reasoning, like not drinking when others are drinking fully to company then you drink is okay I guess, but you can company with 0% alcoholic drinks too.
Some people like the taste of beer though, it would be like drinking a Sprite
@njastar: Aren't the 0% alcoholic drinks, (from alcoholic brands) supposed to replicate the taste exactly the same as a standard alcoholic drink?
@USER DC: Yes, the 0% alcohol beers mimic real beer taste. My GF loves them.
Personally, I don't like them. The lack of alcohol doesn't trigger whatever it is in the brain that likes alcohol and encourages you to have another. Despite that triggering, I'm happy to drink one beer and stop.
While I appreciate & support peoples right to not drink alcohol I find the non-drinkers quite judgemental. Like Jonagrah, I'm fully capable of controlling my alcohol intake and staying well below the legal limit for driving.
May car insurance PDS states under General Exclusions "The driver was under the influence of any ahcohol".
If you are 'legally' able to drive, then you are covered. aka valid licence, under the legal limit etc.
Comparison table. No, this isn't everyone. Don't @ me…
TL;DR: Don't drive after drinking alcohol. Limits aren't there as a goal. Otherwise, choose Allianz or Coles, although you may need to prove you weren't "impaired" with the latter. Although looking at it that way, most of them say "under the influence of", so you could say that you weren't "under the influence of" even with alcohol in your system… but I think we're splitting hairs here, since most of the time the presence of alcohol in your system wouldn't be questioned unless the accident was serious and/or there are already suspicions as to alcohols involvement. In which case my original advice still stands: don't drink and drive, you bloody idiot.
#notfinancialadvise
Vendor PDS Page Clause AAMI aami-comprehensive-car-insurance-pds.pdf pg 18 Alcohol, drugs, medication an incident occurring when your car is being driven by, or is in the charge of, anyone who: • was under the influence of, or had their judgement affected by, any alcohol, drug or medication; Allianz POL1327DIR.pdf pg 23 Driver exclusions There is no cover if you or anyone you permit to drive, use or be in charge of your car: • exceeds the legal limit of alcohol in their blood or breath in the state where an accident happened or is under the influence of any drugs Budget PDSA.pdf pg 11 General exclusions applying to the whole policy This policy does not cover any loss, damage or liability arising out of the use or operation of the car: • if at the time of or immediately following an incident, the driver of the car: • was under the influence of alcohol or any drug, Coles coles-car-insurance-pds-oct2021.pdf pg 30 Driving under the influence we do not cover loss or damage if your car was being driven by any person: • impaired by any drug, alcohol or medication, GIO gio-car-insurance-pds-22-3-21.pdf pg 20 Alcohol, drugs, medication an incident occurring when your car is being driven by, or is in the charge of, anyone who: • was under the influence of, or had their judgement affected by any alcohol, drug or medication; NRMA car_pds_0721_nsw_act_tas_qld.pdf pg 56 The driver We don’t provide cover if the driver of your vehicle: • was under the influence of any alcohol or drug QBE QM8505-0421 QBE Comprehensive Car Insurance PDS (web).pdf pg 19 Driver There is no cover if the driver of your car at the time of the incident was: • under the influence of alcohol and/or a drug (including medication); RACQ RACQ Motor Vehicle Insurance PDS for renewals and new policies with a commencement date from 21 Sept pg 70 Driver responsibilities You are not covered for: • Incidents which occur when anyone in charge or control of your vehicle or your caravan or trailer: • is under the influence of any alcohol or drug or both, RACV motor-insurance-pds-current pg 26 Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs If, at the time of an incident, the driver of your vehicle or a substitute vehicle: • was under the influence of any alcohol or drug; we will refuse any claim Suncorp suncorp-insurance-car-insurance-product-disclosure-statement.pdf pg 20 Alcohol, drugs, medication an incident occurring when your car is being driven by, or is in the charge of, anyone who: • was under the influence of, or had their judgement affected by any alcohol, drug or medication; Youi car-pds.pdf pg 21 15. when you or a person with your consent are driving the car and: • are under the influence of alcohol and/or a drug and/or any other intoxicating substance; #notfinancialadvise
#notfinancialadviCe 😬
I know. I intentionally misspelled it due to the hashtag itself being due to the perception that any time you give out information that could impact people financially you need to disclaim that it is not proper advice.
If this list is correct up to date, none of these companies except Allianz and Youi will pay a claim if your car is taken by a drunk joyrider without your permission and crashes into a Lamborghini destroying both cars! You would get nothing from your insurer for your car and presumably the Lamborghini owner and its insurer would lodge a common law claim against you! Thankfully your compulsory third party personal injury insurance would probably still be valid and the driver of the Lamborghini (and the joyrider's passengers) would be covered for injuries or death.
Interesting point. I wonder if the lack of consent wording is intentional there. In my opinion, the fact that the car is stolen should trump the driver being under the influence, but you're right to be concerned! I'd be curious if there's any actual instances of this happening.
Yes, driving under the influence means the alcohol is REALLY affecting you. It what you get charged with when you are so drunk that you fall over etc. In WA it's automatic if over 0.15. Yep, pretty high.
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/wa/consol_act/rta1974…
Who wants to be having an argument with an insurance company about the definition of ‘influence’ when making a claim though? It would be pretty costly and stressful if it ever went to court.
How would the insurance company know though? They are not going to give you an blood alcohol test you and the police are under no obligation to release the details of any test they perform if they don't bring charges.
I can see the clause applying in unusual cases where there's eyewitness testimony or if there's a social media post showing the driver drinking before the accident. Perhaps if there's a post mortem report of the blood alcohol of a driver they won't pay out to the deceased estate.
I have no idea but I never drive after drinking even the smallest amount. It’s easy enough where I live to Uber, taxi, bus or walk wherever I need to go without needing to drive.