In­sur­ance is­sues

Kapi-Mana News - - OPINION -


I read the ar­ti­cle ‘‘Crash vic­tim court out on in­sur­ance’’ with in­ter­est [ KMN, May 1].

From my read­ing of the ar­ti­cle, I doubt that any case against AA would not suc­ceed as Mrs O’hal­lo­ran-price has no in­sur­ance, and thus she has no con­trac­tual ar­range­ment with AA.

Mrs O’hal­lo­ran-price’s claim would ap­pear to be against the owner, or driver, of the car that caused the dam­age.

How­ever, I un­der­stand that the onus is on Mrs O’hal­lo­ran-price to prove that the other driver acted in a neg­li­gent man­ner and that neg­li­gence caused dam­age to her ve­hi­cle.

It is my un­der­stand­ing that third party in­sur­ance meets a ve­hi­cle owner’s, and their au­tho­rised driver’s, le­gal li­a­bil­ity to pay for dam­age that they have caused to some one else’s prop­erty as a re­sult of neg­li­gence.

AA as the in­surer of a ve­hi­cle would have a duty to pro­tect their client’s in­ter­ests by deny­ing a claim un­til the neg­li­gence of their client is proven. At the point that their client is proven to be

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.