When driver added engine insult to sump injury

● In a case handled by the ombudsman for short-term insurance last year, reckless behaviour caused by driving a vehicle away from an accident scene — with the aim of reaching a service station — caused a policyholder to lose out on a R200,000 claim for accidental damage to his vehicle.

Mr B was involved in an accident on Johannesburg’s Jan Smuts Avenue at about 6pm last August after he swerved to avoid a large pothole in the road, and collided with a road divider.

His car came to a standstill just after a sharp bend in the road and, to avoid the chance of other vehicles crashing into him, and in the interests of his own safety in an area he described as well-known for smash-and-grab incidents, he decided to drive to a nearby service station.

He drove the vehicle a further 800m from the collision site before the engine stalled.

The insurance assessor’s report stated that the engine sump was damaged as a direct result of impact from the collision and this portion of Mr B’s claim of about R66,000 was authorised.

However, the report also stated that the vehicle sustained engine damage of more than R200,000. This was because the engine seized up as a result of being driven without oil — the sump damage having resulted in a loss of engine oil.

Warning light

The assessor said the loss of oil pressure would have been immediately indicated on the vehicle’s dashboard’s oil pressure warning light to alert the driver to turn off the engine to prevent any further damage.

Mr B confirmed that he noticed a number of warning lights on the vehicle’s dashboard and saw that the vehicle was not responding well after the collision, but he drove on in the interest of safety.

He said he was unaware that there might have been an oil leak that could cause major damage.

The insurer rejected the R200,000 claim for the engine damage on the basis that Mr B had a duty to take reasonable care to prevent further damage to the vehicle after the collision.

The ombudsman upheld the insurer’s decision.

Driving a vehicle from the accident was not in itself an indication of recklessness, and whether Mr B was aware that the engine was leaking oil was immaterial to the case, ombudsman Deanne Wood said in the ruling.

It is a well-known fact that a vehicle is in danger of major mechanical damage when it displays a warning light on its instrument cluster.

A driver is expected to familiarise himself with the essential aspects of a vehicle’s manual.

At the very least, a reasonable person would know to stop the vehicle and switch off the engine, she said.

When Mr B continued to operate the vehicle, he courted the danger of a separate cause of damage which amounted to recklessness, she said.