Our Car Was Rear Ended by a Stolen Vehicle during a Police Chase

Ldhon123 on 26/04/2023 - 00:59
Last edited 26/04/2023 - 09:43 by 1 other user

Dear Ozbargain Community,

We need to share a frustrating situation that we're currently facing. Recently, my mother's car - a 2009 Honda CRV Lux - was rear-ended by a stolen car that was being pursued by the police. Despite the fact that the other driver was fully covered by Allianz Insurance, we were informed on the phone that they are not liable for our damages, leaving us to bear the cost of the repairs.

The police investigation is close to completion and the suspect, a 17-year-old repeat offender, has been identified. However, this does not help in terms of the financial burden that we are facing as a result of the collision. Unfortunately, we don't have comprehensive insurance since the car is an older model. We are considering legal action, however we don't know where to start and we are quite shocked that Allianz allegedly do not insure damage to other property if their clients car is stolen.

We could use your help and advice on how to navigate this complicated situation. If anyone has any experience with similar circumstances or can suggest resources to aid in this process, we would be grateful for your support.

Thank you for taking the time to read this message, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Automotive Honda SUV

closed Comments

  • mab5125 on 26/04/2023 - 11:22
    +5

    Not sure what state you're in but try the below:

    https://www.victimsofcrime.vic.gov.au/

    A friend of mine had his car stolen from his driveway while he stepped out and stupidly kept it running.

    Insurance said bad luck you're not covered, so he went through Victims of Crime and actually received a payout. Not enough to replace the car but better than nothing. Give it a go if you're in VIC, no idea if the same thing exists elsewhere.

    • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 12:25

      What a great initiative, other states should follow this model. I believe in WA there is similar support but compensation is only possible if the victim of an offence are injured and/or experience financial loss as a result of the injury

      • gromit on 26/04/2023 - 15:05

        great for areas you shouldn't have to consider, however it seems like an incredible waste of tax payer money for things like cars that should be insured. perhaps it should be limited to the insurance excess for a car.

        • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 15:17

          It's not free insurance, this specifically only helps people that are victims of crime. In most cases it probably won't even cover the full extent of the damage or injury but it's something. You wouldn't be able to claim for a typical accident that is a civil matter, but if it's a result of reckless crime with an prosecuted offender that is in no position to be able to offer compensation I'd be happy for my tax dollars to help innocent victims.

          • gromit on 26/04/2023 - 15:19

            @[Deactivated]: why though? a properly insured car is already covered for that, you are basically offering extra insurance to people that choose to gamble.

            PS: not against this sort of program, I think it is great. But there are enough other areas with victims that could benefit. It is like those that live in a flood plain or bushfire zone and don't insure but expect others to cover them when it inevitably goes wrong.

            • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 15:42

              @gromit: To be clear I'm talking about the scheme in general and not OPs specific case. It's just my opinion, and you often hear victims fall through the cracks and becomes victims in more way than one through no fault of their own.

              Say you have a mobile dog washing business and some guy in a stolen car destroys your whole business trying to get away from the cops - you might have all the insurance in the world but it takes 6-12 months for you to get a payout and source a new van and equipment . You're not injured enough for TPD and your income protection insurance might not kick in for 3 months and when it does it only covers 50% of your income. I'd be glad if there was an initiative in place to help that person out until they get back on their feet.

              • gromit on 26/04/2023 - 15:55

                @[Deactivated]: Then I agree with you to some extent. I don't object for victims to be helped where they have no fault and had necessary protections in place to cover the difference to what insurance can't or won't cover. It is only those that are using it as a crutch replacement for having insurance I don't like.

                • Koffee on 26/04/2023 - 17:42

                  @gromit: A Victim of Crime is a Victim of Crime (especially if OP had their door locked and didn't have valuables out etc etc)

                  Part of the Justice system's remit is to exert a deterrence effect on offending. If it's failing to do this, then it's more often than not partly the State failing to do its job.

                  • gromit on 26/04/2023 - 17:51

                    @Koffee: that is where I disagree, not all victims are equal. If you are a drunk wandering down a dark seedy alley with money hanging out of your pocket then victim or not I don't think they deserve a cent of compensation if mugged. people whine about victim blaming and use that as an excuse for taking no personal responsibility for their actions. The reality is the world is not a fairy tale land full of rainbows and unicorns and there are a LOT of people that are irresponsible aholes or looking to take advantage, if you choose to not take reasonable precautions you are part of the problem not just a victim.

                • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 19:03

                  @gromit: I think we're just looking at this through a different lens. I believe you're saying you disagree with this being free insurance, and I agree with you there - but it's not meant to replace insurance. Insurance would be about replacing the car where my understanding is that victim compensation is a little bit of money to help you get through a tough spot you're now in due to a crime committed by someone else. In this case the compensation isn't about buying a new car (and it probably wont be near enough for that) but it might help cover the cost of alternative transport for while while you figure out.

                  I doubt it's necessarily mutually exclusive - and full disclosure I'm no expert here I'm no expert here but from what I can deduce, whether you have insurance or not would have no bearing on whether you can claim victim of crime compensation.

    • coffeeinmyveins on 26/04/2023 - 15:35
      +1

      A friend of mine had his car stolen from his driveway while he stepped out and stupidly kept it running.

      I reckon if everyone read the PDS of their insurance policies we'd have a lot safer drivers on the road. People would probably stop drink driving if they knew it could bite them that hard.

  • tsunamisurfer on 26/04/2023 - 11:37

    Unfortunately this is a risk one takes when self insuring.

    There are lots of scumbags out there even though you can be the most careful driver.

  • Surfsalot on 26/04/2023 - 11:51

    Any car worth $8-10k is worth paying comprehensive. the end

    • Bargainitis on 26/04/2023 - 12:11

      lol

    • Brick Tamland on 26/04/2023 - 21:10
      +3

      My take is: Any car that you cant afford to lose requires comprehensive insurance

      • fozzie on 26/04/2023 - 22:19
        +1

        Ditto

      • Protractor on 28/04/2023 - 13:18

        "My take is: Any car that you cant afford to lose requires comprehensive insurance"
        & if you can't afford to pay cash for damaging someone else's, and/or dislike being sued or losing part of your asset base.

  • trapper on 26/04/2023 - 12:07
    +4

    Despite the fact that the other driver was fully covered by Allianz Insurance, we were informed on the phone that they are not liable for our damages, leaving us to bear the cost of the repairs.

    This doesn't make any sense… why would you think the owner of the stolen car (or his insurance company) would be liable for this crash that they had nothing to do with?

    The guy who stole the car and crashed it is the only liable party here. You can sue him if you think it will be worth your time and effort.

  • Dack Smith on 26/04/2023 - 12:13
    +4

    Tough luck OP, young inbred mongrels just under 18 roam the streets because of dumb laws that love to give juveniles a free pass.

    You could go to court but I suspect it won’t be worth it and the little arsewipe has no assets or income either, and they have rights.

    • Protractor on 26/04/2023 - 20:18
      -1

      Did you stay inside till your were 18 or something?
      BTW, everyone has rights. I like it that way. It's our bread & butter.
      There's so many humans on this steaming rock, everyone these days is inbred.

      OP rolled the dice. That;s life.
      User (in this case 'loser' ) pays

      • Ghost47 on 26/04/2023 - 23:19

        everyone these days is inbred.

        Wtf lmao.

        • Protractor on 27/04/2023 - 10:48

          True story. Trace your ancestry properly. Guess what?

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:39

      The age of criminal responsibility in Australian states and territories is 10, and there are howls at attempts moving it to 12 or 14. No one ‘just under 18’ is getting off any easier than an adult.

      You don’t take it to court, you take it to small claims and get a garnishee order against their wages. Eventually they will get some income, may take a while. Took 5 years in the case of one of our clients that skipped out on paying an invoice.

      They can’t pay off the debt while in prison.

  • capslock on 26/04/2023 - 13:08
    +3

    Look at it this way - you have saved thousands over the years by not buying insurance. You can now use those savings by fixing the car or put it towards buying a new one.

    • coffeeinmyveins on 26/04/2023 - 15:33

      Depends how long they had it for. Looks like this year/model goes for about $10k on the used car market and I doubt they had it from 2009.

      If they had it from new and never had comprehensive the entirety of the car then it's a zero sum game beacuse that's about how much they would have spent on comprehensive in that time.

      OP took a gamble and is surprised when it didn't work out for them.

  • capslock on 26/04/2023 - 13:12

    I agree with others saying legal action is a waste of time. I would move on with my life and buy insurance next time.

    • trapper on 27/04/2023 - 21:45

      Can still be satisfying though, even if you get nothing. :)

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:41

      Small claims is absolutely worth pursuing, it’s not that difficult and you can get a garnishee order so they will pay small amounts as soon as they start earning an income. You hit a car uninsured, you will pay one way or another.

      Third Party property insurance also covers being hit by uninsured identifiable drivers up to $5k.

  • Brianqpr on 26/04/2023 - 14:03

    Your only options are to pursue the offender (legal fees will be involved and sounds like they may not have much in the way of assets anyway) or live with the cost.

    • trapper on 26/04/2023 - 17:46
      +1

      It will be small claims so there would be no legal costs to pay. Just a small fee to lodge the claim.

      The guy won't have any money to pay though, so probably little point.

      • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 20:48
        +1

        He could be directed to submit a projected budget to a judge who will then rule he pay $10 or $20 a month for XX years. This happened to me. And often they stop paying meaning more cost to drag back into court, more time off work, more lost income, etc at which point people give up.

        • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:44

          You get a garnishee order in QLD at least, their employer has to pay you. They don’t get to not pay. In my bosses case it took 5 years for the person that owed them to get a job, but boy were they surprised at their first pay check.

  • jatbinks on 26/04/2023 - 14:17
    +1

    Underage crime is getting out of hand and the penal system keeps letting them get away with it, while the community keep on suffering the repercussions. Unfortunately you are in that bucket. The system won't penalize the 17yo unless they are charged as an adult, either way the lawyer fees would exceed what you would pay for in repairs. I would recommend selling off the car and buying a cheap 2000 Camry till your financial situation improves.

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:46

      The age of criminal responsibility is 10 in Australia so…. Nowhere are you not an adult at 17. They can’t even lift it to 12 or 14 without protest.

      You don’t have any lawyers fees, you take it to small claims, the fee is a hundred dollars or so to file, no lawyers allowed. You then get a garnishee order against their future wages. Getting away with damage only occurs because people don’t bother to do that.

  • Ryanek on 26/04/2023 - 14:52
    -1

    I stopped reading when OP said they didnt have comprehensive insurance

  • bobolo on 26/04/2023 - 14:56

    having no insurance = relying on your pull out game to avoid a pregnancy. You'll win most times, but when you don't, it's gonna cost you

  • gromit on 26/04/2023 - 15:00

    This is simply the chance you take when you decide not to have comprehensive insurance, it really isn't a complicated situation, it is quite simple. The only person you can chase is the car thief that caused the crash, no one else has any liability. Basically you are hoping/betting when uninsured that someone else doesn't screw you over, unfortunately you lost that bet. You can try and chase the thief but good luck with that, most likely throwing away more money. My younger brother has had this happen to him TWICE (once had his uninsured car stolen and crashed and once had another stolen car crash into him and total his car), you would think he would learn after the first incident, he is buying another car at moment I wonder if he will do the same.

  • coffeeinmyveins on 26/04/2023 - 15:30

    we are quite shocked that Allianz allegedly do not insure damage to other property if their clients car is stolen

    we don't have comprehensive insurance

    So you took a gamble because it's an older vehicle by not buying comprehensive and you're surprised pikachu face when you aren't covered?

    "Yes please, I'd like to have my cake and eat it too"

  • FlyingMiffy on 26/04/2023 - 15:56
    +1

    Should have gotten comprehensive insurance. You made a decision to not insure the car because its "an older model"… perhaps its time to buy that newer model car with the insurance money you’ve save along the way??

  • voiletmay on 26/04/2023 - 16:00
    +1

    Um we have cars in our family worth much less than this and still have full comprehensive insurance. Just not worth the risk.

  • Euphemistic on 26/04/2023 - 16:33
    +1

    You’re out of luck if you don’t have comprehensive. You need to chase the driver, who being a 17yo broke ass car thief is unlikely to ever lay you back.

    Does your third party insurance have uninsured driver cover? That might be your best chance at getting some money back.

  • Herbse on 26/04/2023 - 17:31
    +1

    Previously, I had no idea that third party did not cover you if the other party has no insurance. But I did that there are some insurance companies that cover you up to a certain amount if you have third party insurance with them and have a not at fault claim and the other party has no insurance/stolen vehicle etc.

    Shannon's is one of them, I found out when I was run into someone who had lost their licence. I was in the same situation you are in, stressing about the financial burden until I read the PDS which mentioned that I was covered for up to $5k and I was able to get the full $5k when my car was written off.

    Check your PDS, and anyone considering getting third party insurance. Look for a company that offers this so you're covered in this situation.

    • derrida derider on 26/04/2023 - 18:33

      But that's why it is called "third party" - it only covers liability for money owed to a third party (your are the first party to the insurance contract, the insurer the second party). It might help if you thought of comprehensive insurance as "first party insurance".

      • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 20:29
        +1

        But he does understand that. I'm with Shannons too. Their 3rd party covers not just the other driver but you TOO, when you usually need comprehensive to get anything when you're at fault. But he received $5000 when he only had 3rd party.

      • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:50

        This is incorrect, go read any third party property policy statements I’ve yet to find one that doesn’t cover your car (first party) when hit by an uninsured driver, for up to $5k. It might help if people read a policy document instead of spreading misinformation.

        The risk with third party property insurance is if you have a car >$5k, or cause the damage to your own car. That’s it.

    • Kegsta on 27/04/2023 - 13:16
      +1

      This, if you have third party with RACV for example they have damage done by an uninsured motorist section.
      You'll need the identity of the at fault party from the cops but check your PDS.

  • rlf on 26/04/2023 - 18:20

    You have zero recourse. The 17 year old has no money.

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:51

      You get a garnishee order against their future wages at minimum if you can bother a few hours off work and the hundred or so dollars to file. Unless they die they will eventually get some job and be surprised at that line item on their pay slip.

  • belongsinforums on 26/04/2023 - 18:43

    I just feel sorry for our youth /s

  • [Deactivated] on 26/04/2023 - 20:21
    +3

    Unfortunately, we don't have comprehensive insurance since the car is an older model.

    My car is 1991 and I have comprehensive. The difference between the two insurances was something like $140 so just isn't worth the risk. And it's not always just about the CAR. Some comprehensive policies/companies give bonus cover that will pay your medical fees from an accident, for a hotel overnight and/or a taxi home, provide another car for a week or two to give you time to find another car, etc all of which would add up to more than the price difference of the two policy types. Imagine if the scumbag had taken out your leg, eye, etc. I don't know how easy they are to actually claim on but at least it's some hope.

    e.g. A few nights ago some nitwit coming the other direction who crossed the double yellow lines of his single lane to try and overtake, even though he was only 250-300m from a roundabout that opens into two lanes on the other side. He nearly killed himself, me, and probably at least the car of people he was overtaking if not the next one or two cars behind that as well. All because he couldn't wait just 300m! At first I thought the second set of headlights coming toward me was an optical illusion due to a curve in the road - thought he was actually behind the first car… but no… it was because he was IN MY LANE, both our cars hurtling toward each other at 100km/h.

    Instead of just pulling back in the dog went for it and attempted to overtake. By the time I realised he was BESIDE the car he was trying to overtake and in MY lane, me hitting the brakes would have probably sent me off the wet road into a tree or sliding sideways into the several cars coming the other way. So the only control I had left in that split second was to quickly jerk my steering wheel to the left and hope I didn't start sliding on the wet road or gravel into the oncoming cars. Our cars only missed each other by about 40cm and that's with me driving in the gravel between the tar and the white plastic reflectors and galvanised rail.

    And as he passed I saw it… the red P plate… the sign of every moron who shouldn't have gotten his license until 21 years old. Lucky for him it was night so I didn't see what type of car it was, plus the several other cars so close together making it unable to pinpoint the correct car by the time I turned around. Otherwise I might have lost it, spun my car around, followed until he stopped and b____n the liv__g day_____s out of him.

    The point being you don't know when some waste of oxygen is going to ruin your day/week/family/LIFE. Next time GET COMPREHENSIVE. I haven't needed it for 20 years but you can bet the moment you don't have it, something like this happens… and it did!

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:55

      If your car is <$5k even third party property will cover damage to your car done by an identified third party. That’s why the difference isn’t that great (for older drivers at least).

      Back when I was 17 comprehensive insurance had a premium more than my car cost :o . When someone hit me I found out that the third party property insurance covered it anyway.

      Now there’s negligible difference but my car is cheap and I have a top driver rating.

  • ceroau on 26/04/2023 - 20:28
    +1

    Expensive lesson. Insurance isn't about how much money you can potentially make, it about mitigating risk. It doesn't matter if your car is only worth X it still worth full comprehensive if you can't afford to spend X to replace the car if something goes wrong. Is saving maybe a couple 100 a year, worth the approximate 10,000 you're now up for? Ain't no way in hell you're going to be able to get 10K + legal expenses from a 17 year old repeat offender.

  • Kranbone on 26/04/2023 - 20:45

    I actually have a friend who went through a similar scenario. Insurer wasn't liable as the car was stolen and they were on 3rd party. He had to raise a civil case after the criminal matter drew to a close.

    Even with a statement of claim, the guilty party never paid, repeat offender. Really sucks.

  • DingoBlue on 26/04/2023 - 20:47

    You don’t have insurance, therefore you are not insured. Sorry.

  • Brick Tamland on 26/04/2023 - 21:14

    Unfortunately OP you're stuffed. Third party only covers other people's damage. You are basically running the gauntlet of your car being a loss in most situations. If you cant afford to lose your car you cant afford not to have comprehensive insurance.

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 10:58

      It doesn’t actually, check the PDS, I’ve yet to see one (third party property only) that won’t cover at least $5k if the uninsured at fault party is identified.

      It won’t cover damage you cause to your car, or damage where you can’t identify the at fault party, and you’re still left having to pursue the driver for anymore than $5k damage.

  • The Value on 27/04/2023 - 00:36
    +5

    Look at it this way. The money you saved from not paying insurance premiums should be enough to pay for a new car.

  • bigbadboogieman on 27/04/2023 - 06:55

    Sorry for you OP. I've been caught out by 3rd party insurance too. Second cheaper car but I loved it. Paid $2600 out of pocket for repairs in 2017. Basically sold the car after repairs because I couldn't afford to keep it after paying. Never bought third party ever again.

    Sucks but sometimes bad things happen to good people or good things happen to bad people. It's no one's fault and there isn't anything much you can do. Your mother and you are uninjured, healthy, happy and will probably come out stronger. Good luck!

    • kerfuffle on 27/04/2023 - 09:21

      Never bought third party ever again.

      Hope that means you now have comprehensive insurance rather than driving around without any sort of property damage insurance

      • bigbadboogieman on 27/04/2023 - 09:21
        +1

        yep thats what it means. I am on OzB and love my badges.

  • thebossmel on 27/04/2023 - 07:07
    +2

    I have gone through exactly same situation.
    Check if your third party insurance has a cover for Uninsured Driver damage. In my case it had a cover for $5000.
    Give the driver details along with police report to your insurance.
    It took almost a year for me to get the claim settled but I was able to get 5k from my third party insurance.

  • Hackney on 27/04/2023 - 07:48
    -1

    Pointless thread!

  • kaleidoscope on 27/04/2023 - 08:20
    +1

    Sucks to be in that position op.

    When you look at the facts though, if you are driving a partially insured or no insured vehicle, it is because you have decided to cover for the damages to your car in an incident. Other driver being insured or not, is entirely irrelevant. How is this different from hit and run incident where other driver was not identified, when you drive third party or uninsured vehicle.

  • pjetson on 27/04/2023 - 11:38

    Does the OP have third party insurance? Some policies cover damage to your vehicle by uninsured third parties, which seems to be what has effectively happened here.

  • antojamo on 27/04/2023 - 13:08

    How much damage are we talking about? Have you got a quote to repair? Is the car drivable? Photo?

  • FloatingPoint on 27/04/2023 - 13:30

    No point to take that 17-yr old scumbag to court. You will squeeze nothing out from that criminal.

    Not worth to pay for comprehensive insurance = self insured. It's a gamble and you lost.
    fyi the comprehensive of my 2009 Corolla only cost me $360 a year. The car only worth 6-7k max, but I just don't wanna take any risk to play that game.

    • bathuu on 28/04/2023 - 05:44

      Who is your insurer. I wanna see if they can give me comprehensive for $360.

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 11:01

      Even third party property will pay up to $5k if you are hit by an identified, uninsured driver. The gamble is damage you cause or if you can’t identify the driver. That’s why comprehensive is a small increment for older drivers on cheap cars. If you don’t do the damage there’s not much added risk for the insurer for making it comprehensive, it’s a good margin for them.

  • Eeples on 27/04/2023 - 13:37

    OP has hit and run.

  • UFO on 27/04/2023 - 16:59
    +2

    DO NOT LET THIS GO, THERE IS A CHEAP WAY TO GET THIS BEFORE THE COURT

    Small Claims Court/Tribunal in your relevant State or Territory.
    There's set limits to what can be handled obviously, but we are talking about an older car of lesser value (not a Merc or anything).

    No lawyers, minimal cost to lodge your claim (less than $100 normally).

    Photo's and quotes for repair of damage (x3), police report proving who was responsible for that damage (wait for court conviction), any other costs/expenses borne by you to arrange temporary transport because of damaged car… anything in reasonable costs incurred by you directly because of his reckless actions. There's even a bit for emotional stress/worry etc. Having that happen to anyone would clearly cause someone a lot of stress.

    No lengthy court case, no lawyers, repayment schedule that'll probably result in payments made over the next 20-30 years or something. But still… better than no payment at all.

    They will offer mediation between you and them (in separate rooms- runner goes between rooms with counter offers). If no agreement can be made to try and work out a court sanctioned payment plan, you proceed to court/tribunal (normally on the same day) and magistrate decides. How much and over what period (its normally a worse deal than what you can negotiate within mediation, but least something happens).

    17yo or not, there's clearly civil repercussions this young man needs to face. His parents/guardians too.
    You steal a car its not just the legalities of that, its the civil stuff too (cops only sort out the former).

    Another option is ambulance chaser lawyers… no win no fee setups. But you know they are going to take a massive chunk of whatever you get. Might be a good first option for advice, but they may knock you back because of the relatively small amount in question. Petty/small claims court is most likely your best option, but DON'T let it go. This young man needs a reminder that stupid decisions in life have consequences. A weekly deduction from whatever payment he gets (work/dole etc) will just perfect over the next 20 years or so. And if he fails to pay, that will have further ramifications in anything he tries to own in the future (car, house, bank accounts etc). Enforcement orders can have those things repossessed and sold to pay any outstanding debts (and accruing interest on outstanding amounts). CONSEQUENCES!

    • brendanm on 27/04/2023 - 17:29
      -1

      Haha, how are you going to get money out of a career youth criminal? Very likely the parents are also of similar character and don't care either.

      • MementoMori on 27/04/2023 - 18:02
        +1

        The point is not to get the money, the point is to apply a punishment to the offender.

        • brendanm on 27/04/2023 - 18:06
          -1

          There is no punishment for the offender. They can't take money off you if you have less than $X in your account.

          • UFO on 27/04/2023 - 22:46

            @brendanm: You wanna bet?

            Once you get an order, they can and will garnish assets if you continue to not pay.

            Even a criminal wants to own something one day. Even a criminal needs a bank account…. even if its just for his dole payment. They can and will take that money from them… it happens every single day, sometimes years or even decades later. IT ALWAYS catches up, and it always costs much more than they could ever realise. You are thinking short term. It's the long game that really stuffs with the criminal. And its a gift that keeps giving… $20 here, $100 there. A constant reminder of their rotten selfish behaviour, and of consequences that must be paid. It's the best form of punishment for those who don't care about the law and criminal records. They DO care about money!

    • Protractor on 27/04/2023 - 19:00
      -2

      Waste of time and oxygen.
      As if ppl who made the wrong decision initially have the wherewithal to do all or any of that extensive venture/s.

      And then there's > blood - stone = 0

      "17yo or not, there's clearly civil repercussions this young man needs to face. His parents/guardians too.
      You steal a car its not just the legalities of that, its the civil stuff too (cops only sort out the former)"
      ^ Too much American TV.
      The legal and justice system is as clagged up as the health system. Ask the cops who recklessly chased the insured car to pass the hat around OP

      • UFO on 27/04/2023 - 22:57
        -1

        Spoken like a cheerleader for criminals, nicely done!

        Small claims court (different names for each state) IS EXACTLY FOR these types of matters. The criminal justice system is clogged up. But civil matters are just as important (and in some cases even more important). OP has been wronged, and your advice is to not follow proper legal recourse and try and recoup potentially thousands of dollars. You're either so rich that you don't care, a criminal yourself, or so dumb to not realise the your own legal rights even when clearly explained to you in black and white.

        • Protractor on 28/04/2023 - 09:46

          Misinterpretation by dismissal.
          The OP (foolishly uninsured) can follow your advice by all means, but I think it's a waste of time. As was the police chase. And waste of money.
          Police chases are a sport in Australia.
          Cool, now I'm rich, a cheerleader, a crim and previously a Chinese spy according to the armchair lawyers.

          You are an idealist.Be prepared to be repeatedly disappointed in life.
          (If your advice is coming from a legal background, why not represent the OP. Put your kindness to use?)

    • jayzee on 27/04/2023 - 22:36

      It's a genuine question, how do you proceed a civil claim without the address/contact method of the offender? Police won't give it to you due to privacy things.

      • UFO on 27/04/2023 - 22:53

        Driver left scene of accident without providing details?

        If Police don't 'facilitate exchange of those details', then clearly something is amiss. OP needs to request that either Police provide that information as required by law, or prosecute the offender for not doing so. The summons to appear in court can be served on the offender on the day that person comes to court for the earlier matter. There are plenty of ways to skin a fish, you just need to be persistent enough.

        • Protractor on 28/04/2023 - 12:56

          Is that sound legal advice?
          OP was under 18.
          I thought police and courts rarely just flippantly 'exchange' details of juvenile offenders.
          Surely you would have to have a lawyer contact the Commissioner of police to 'break' that tenet?
          You would have to 'serve' the offender post conviction, anyway.
          And they may be off to jail.

  • MementoMori on 27/04/2023 - 18:01

    This is a horrible situation, I feel for the OP.

    I had a similar situation too, police kicked down a side gate on my property to apprehend an offender. Gate destroyed. I ended up having to pay it. To be honest, I didn't even know where to start looking for any kind of compensation.

    If it were me I'd still pursue justice on the brat, even if he'll never pay, just so it adds to his rap sheet.

  • iamchriss on 27/04/2023 - 18:29

    Does you state have a victims of crime fund?

    Otherwise speak to the police about seeking restitution; the judge may order the offender to pay restitution to the victims - again no guarantee that you will get your money.

  • Protractor on 27/04/2023 - 18:55
    +1

    One thread, no more posts.

    Mmmm hmm.

    • Brick Tamland on 27/04/2023 - 19:42
      +2

      This is the way

      • Protractor on 27/04/2023 - 19:50

        Yes,it seems it is.
        the username is pretty zero to one maximum posts across the net.
        OP should go to Bali, fake a scooter crash & crowd fund . Social media Strayans love a good stupidity cause to blow money on.

  • Rukiata on 27/04/2023 - 19:45

    I have to pay 1150 for mine. A 2019 rio in dandenong north is the place why it cost so much more or am i just getting ripped off?

    How are people only paying 500?

    • kerfuffle on 28/04/2023 - 09:49

      Not living in Dandenong North or having a relatively new car. Not shitting on your suburb, but it's true where you live affects your premiums. Mine is $2100 for a $44K car and I live in an area where people are known to be crap drivers

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 11:07

      Age, location, driving record, car value.

      When I was 17 it was at least $2500 for comprehensive on a $2000 car, I unsurprisingly declined. It’s now $250 for a 20 year old car.

  • Peon on 27/04/2023 - 21:35
    +3

    Seeing as the offender will be unable pay for the damages, he should become OP's butler…

    • jayzee on 27/04/2023 - 22:39
      +1

      Believe me, you don't want who was responsible to the damage in this case to be your servant of any kind.

  • Lockieasy on 27/04/2023 - 22:12
    +1

    I thought the idea of not buying comprehensive insurance was that the money you saved goes towards a new car when your uninsured car eventually gets randomly totalled.

  • thenavman on 28/04/2023 - 08:36

    I personally think you will be at a further loss if you decided to pursue this further by taking legal action against the responsible individual. It sucks, but I would recommend copping it on the chin and learning a lesson from this. As a suggestion, in the future, for whatever reason, if you decide not to take up a comprehensive insurance policy on your motor vehicles, it might be ideal to allocate maybe $1000 each year in a special fund and not touch it - for events like these. You can perhaps even earn interest on it.

    • JumperC on 28/04/2023 - 11:04

      A small claims filing is a hundred dollars ish, no lawyers allowed so you just need the half day off work. Depending on the state you can then seek a garnishee order and when they eventually get a job their payslip will cause them some confusion.

      If you have third party property you can usually claim up to $5k for damage caused by an identified uninsured driver, and your insurance pursues them for it.

  • Moderatormoocher on 28/04/2023 - 14:33

    Closing thread as OP has not responded

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join