PI lawyer warns that government proposals make no attempt to address defects in law
Government proposals to reform the law on uninsured and hit-and-run drivers fail to meet standards required by European law and are “deeply flawed and partial”, a high-profile personal injury lawyer has warned.
Legal consultant Nicholas Bevan, formerly of Bond Pearce, is urging lawyers and interested parties to respond to the department for transport consultation, Review of the Uninsured and Untraced Drivers’ Agreements, which closes next week.
Bevan says the proposals make no attempt to address the many defects in protection for victims of uninsured and untraceable drivers. Instead, he says, they cover only a small number of peripheral procedural issues.
Writing in NLJ this week, Bevan says the current law is not in keeping with the objectives of the Road Traffic Act 1930, and also fails to meet the minimum standards imposed by the Sixth Motor Insurance Directive (2009/103/EC). For example, he points to policy exclusions under s 148 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 that create loopholes used by insurers to avoid paying out, as well as “a plethora of unjust knock out clauses” for procedural conditions in the current Uninsured and Untraced Drivers Agreements that are “blatantly unlawful”.
“Sadly, the consultation paper is notable for what is left unsaid,” he says.
According to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB), there are currently 1.2 million uninsured motorists on our roads, and about 26,500 people are injured and 130 people killed by uninsured or untraced drivers every year in the UK.
The proposals cover procedural requirements, appeals and disputes, provisions concerning costs, and other general issues.
The secretary of state for transport and the MIB are both party to the agreements, and they provide a framework for the MIB to investigate claims and compensate victims of accidents caused by uninsured or untraced drivers. They were last updated in 1999 and 2003, respectively.
A department for transport spokesperson said: “All responses to the consultation will be considered, and we welcome responses from
those with experience of the issues involved.”
Visit Nicholas Bevan's blog for details of how to respond to the secretary of state for transport.
