dez said:
On the 17 August 2013 I totaled my f30 320i sport, it was seven days old.My car is a write of. The funny bit is that they also do not have any blood test or breathalyzer and also the metro police was on site and they did not arrest me. Yet they have statements saying I was intoxicated. Now I need to take this to the Ombudsman..my car is worst off than yours though. Furthermore I have no criminal records or have no priors yet they repudiated because I was so called intoxicated and I did not tell the true story. I hit my head on the windscreen for crying out load.
zaleonardz@DentDocVPS said:
My car is in Pretoria east SMD..should I also get my car towed out of there?
dez said:
Presumption of the driver being under the influence of alcohol
On Saturday, 5th June 2004, the Insured played golf in the country town of Porterville. He spent some time at the 19th hole and he was on his way home at 21h30. One of the tyres of the vehicle burst, which caused the vehicle to swerve and he then collided with another vehicle. His vehicle rolled and landed in an open piece of land. One of his passengers fell out of the vehicle and walked approximately 5 Kms. to seek help. The Police as well as the Ambulance arrived at the accident scene where the Insured was still trapped in his vehicle. The Insurer rejected liability on the ground that the Insured was driving whilst under the influence of alcohol. The Insurer justified its rejection because the barman at the Golf Club had confirmed that the Insured was in the bar earlier on the incident date, a Farmer confirmed that one of his workers had picked up a crate of beer and two glasses where the vehicle had landed, the insured had been seen at the rugby where he had been seen drinking Red Heart Rum with his friends and a witness, who was at the rugby, confirmed that the Insured was “definitely drunk”.
Ombudsman’s response
The Ombudsman pointed out to the Insurer that no blood alcohol analysis had been taken, no breathalyser was administered and that the Police who arrived at the accident scene, did not arrest the Insured or call for a blood alcohol analysis to be taken. The Ombudsman pointed out that the mere fact that the Insured had been drinking prior to the accident, is insufficient evidence to establish on a balance of probabilities that the Insured was under the influence of liquor at the time of the accident. As they could not produce any evidence of the Insured being under the influence of alcohol other than observations of witnesses, the Insurer met the claim.
I had to also by another Car until this gets sorted out.. 2010 320d sport AT with fifty thousand KMs on it..
