Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

DH is HGV driver, had accident, now company want him to pay?

61 replies

oneoldmare · 09/06/2016 15:17

Hi all, probably more of a WWYD than AIBU but I'll explain as best I can.

My husband is a self employed HGV driver that works for a company. he drives their vehicles and and gets paid an hourly rate.

He used to be employed by the company but they asked all their drivers to go self employed which was all fine, however he hasn't sign a contract since becoming self employed.

He managed to bump the vehicle that he was driving into another one of the companies vehicles when parking in the yard after. Shift. He took photos of the damage and reported this straight away, as is procedure. He did admit that this was his fault and he misjudged a difficult manoeuvre.

I just want to add that he has driven for this company for over 8 years and has never had an accident before.

Anyway, he was annoyed at himself but didn't think too much about it and nothing was said to him from management until yesterday, 1 week later.

They have asked him to pay the £2500 pair bill. They have said that their insurance won't cover it as they are both their vehicles.
I want to know what our options are please if anyone knows.

I understand from their point of view that it was his fault and they shouldn't suffer financially but surely what insurance is for. It's quite a large company so I would presume they have good insurance cover and 1 accident wouldn't make that much difference to their premiums. I know that they have vehicles in accident regularly and none of the other drivers have been asked to pay before even if they were at fault.
Obviously if we don't pay then they can easily stop giving him work as no contract in place and he's not employed by them, but does this seem fair to you?

How will we ensure that if he had a bigger accident and wrote a Car off that they couldn't then ask to be reimbursed for that.

Do you think this company are trying it on.

I have asked him to see the invoice for the works that has been done and for them to put in writing what they want him to pay for and why insurance won't cover it.
Is there anything else we should do.

Paying this bill would be massive for us. We certainly wouldn't have all the money at hand straight away.

OP posts:

WhereTheFuckIsMyCunt · 09/06/2016 16:06

Very odd.

I'm fairly sure if I drove my first car into my van accidently then my car insurance would cover it.

wasonthelist · 09/06/2016 16:07

There's a lot of ignorance about insurance being posted on this thead OP. Operating a Haulage Fleet isn't like insuring your car or even a couple of vans. I still think it is entirely possible there is no insurance cover for the damage, and I can 100% categorically state that it's not a legal requirement to insure for your own damage, either.

That aside, I still think they are taking the piss.

AnnieOnnieMouse · 09/06/2016 16:10

They're trying it on! If the vehicles belong to the firm, then it is their responsibility to cover costs, excesses, insurances etc. Your DH should ensure that the vehicle insurance covers him to drive, tho.
My ds is HGV driver; he is now fully employed, but used to do agency work. He has had the odd accident, and the reactions from the companies have always been 'shit happens'.
The only things he is responsible for are the vehicle checks and his driving, ie, any speeding points/ fines, etc go on his licence. The company just wants to shift the blame, not make a claim, or have to pay the excess.

BaboonBottom · 09/06/2016 16:15

A lot of larger companies do self insure so if there's an accident they pay it as it works out cheaper due to the size. But I'd still argue the self employed bit and if he's expected to pay for accidents he should have it as part of the terms and conditions.

BarbaraofSeville · 09/06/2016 16:15

Maybe the company has third party only insurance and as there is no third party, the damage is not covered. It may be cheaper to pay for repairs to their own vehicles rather than have fully comprehensive insurance especially if they expect their drivers to fund repairs.

firesidechat · 09/06/2016 16:33

You can't just decide that someone employed by you for a number of years is suddenly self employed though, can you?

wasonthelist · 09/06/2016 16:45

Well you're not supposed to be able to. Like a lot of things in this Country, what the law is and what employers get away with aren't the same.

jay55 · 09/06/2016 17:12

On what basis is he self employed? Does he invoice the company for his hours and pay his own tax? Or have they effectively put staff on a zero hours contract and still pay his tax/Ni?
It makes a difference on how it's handled (billing his company, versus billing him the person) and how he should respond.

OurBlanche · 09/06/2016 17:42

Check that government link re being self employed... as others have said there are very specific regulations for being self employed and your DH could have other legal issues to contend with!

Call ACAS for guidance too... I doubt the company are on wholly legal ground here and it is better your DH is fully aware before he offers/discusses or pays anything

whois · 09/06/2016 17:50

he used to be employed by them but now they've asked all their drivers to go self employed? sounds dodgy as fuck.

Word.

The company can jog on. DH in a strong posiiton to fuck them over by reporting to HMRC.

clarrrp · 09/06/2016 18:09

You will need both their insurance and your husbands insurance - if he was self employed then he would have to have his own insurance that covers all aspects of his job - and any contract he has with them for doing the work, and then you need to take it all to your solicitor.

As for comments up thread about it sounding 'dodgy' that companies are asking staff to go self employed - it's not a new thing, is on the rise and is very very common especially in construction and haulage and driving - for instance a taxi firm may have 100 taxi drivers, but they are all self employed and pay a fee to be part of that company and recieve jobs etc from them.

You need to speak to your husbands insurace company and your solicitor once you have this information to see whether the companies insurance people are right or not.

Unfortunately no one can give you accurate advice without knowing the full ins and outs of the various contracts.

OurBlanche · 09/06/2016 18:23

Clarrp the key thing would be how much of the work is for this one company, if he has, or is free, to find work elsewhere, can hire other people to do any work for him, provides materials/machinery for work etc.

If OPs DH drives company vehicles, only works for this company and /or cannot send in his own employee to do the work on his behalf, he is NOT self employed and the company is not acting legally.

There are ins and out, which is why pp posted the government site: www.gov.uk/working-for-yourself/what-counts-as-self-employed

So OP could look for herself!

fascicle · 09/06/2016 18:30

wasonthelist
I still think it is entirely possible there is no insurance cover for the damage

It would be foolish to have no insurance for this sort of damage, when there's a good probability that it will happen from time to time.

I can 100% categorically state that it's not a legal requirement to insure for your own damage, either.

Be useful to have an example/explanation of what you're referring to.

clarrrp · 09/06/2016 18:39

*Clarrp the key thing would be how much of the work is for this one company, if he has, or is free, to find work elsewhere, can hire other people to do any work for him, provides materials/machinery for work etc.

If OPs DH drives company vehicles, only works for this company and /or cannot send in his own employee to do the work on his behalf, he is NOT self employed and the company is not acting legally.*

I completely agree. Which is why I said that the OP needs to get all the documents together and speak to her solicitor who can go through the specific details and advise them.

Discobabe · 09/06/2016 18:41

If he's self employed he should have his own insurance to cover these things. Does he complete a tax return declaring his income?

JinRamen · 09/06/2016 18:44

Does your comprehensive insurance cover him driving other vehicles?

OurBlanche · 09/06/2016 18:52

It was the taxi driver references that were confusing the issue, clarrp. Made it sound as though you were arguing both sides at once.

fascicle the not insure for your own damage is a company can choose not to insure for damage to their own vehicles and property on their own property. Many do, they choose to 'self insure'. The factory yard where DH works does not insure for their own damage, so if a fork lift damages a loading shelf and contents they don't claim, they pay for it. Does not include damage to people, obviously

fascicle · 09/06/2016 19:27

Ah, ok, thanks, makes sense. I did wonder if wason was referring in the second quote to freelance drivers and insurance, rather than on site damage.

oblada · 09/06/2016 19:30

He's most likely an employee, with substantial service, and their request is ridiculous! Also HGV drivers are well sought after normally so they'd be foolish to play games on this. Tell OH to stand his ground and to say 'no thanks'.

wasonthelist · 09/06/2016 21:15

fascicle

It would be foolish to have no insurance for this sort of damage, when there's a good probability that it will happen from time to time.

So you have experience in this area? I mean don't bother listening to an amateur like me who used to do it for a living or anything. When fleets get to a certain size, it is sometimes (depending claims levels and history etc) foolish to buy comprehensive insurance - in the end it can work out cheaper to do your own repairs than pay an insurance company huge premiums so they just give you the money back in claims, minus their margin and overheads of course.

Many large fleets already have repair and maintenance facilities so they can get good economies of scale on minor repairs.

This is especially true for smaller claims and on-site bumps which can be numerous. So in fact, having the insurance may be the more foolish and expensive route - but I'm sure you still know better.

I can 100% categorically state that it's not a legal requirement to insure for your own damage, either

A fleet operator has to comply with the minimum insurance requirements like everyone else - which is to cover the costs of third party injuries and property damage. In actual fact, you don't strictly even need to insure this part - you can leave a deposit of £500,000 with the Accountant General instead.

Anything else is optional, so some fleet operators choose to take their own risk for anything not legally required and repair their own vehicles where their driver is at fault or there's no fault and claim from a thrid party where appropriate.

Hence the OPs DH who admits he's at fault may not have been lied to by his employer when they said there's no insurance cover for the damage he caused - that's not abnormal or illegal.

What is questionable is-
His employment status
Their demand for him to pay out his own pocket

wasonthelist · 09/06/2016 21:17

fascicle the not insure for your own damage is a company can choose not to insure for damage to their own vehicles and property on their own property.

A company can choose not to insure for damage to their own vehicles and property at all. It doesn't matter where it happens.

RoastitBubblyJocks · 09/06/2016 21:24

wasonthelist is correct.

The issue here is that he doesn't sound like he's self employed.

And it definitely doesn't sound like they can force your DH to pay.

Sallyingforth · 09/06/2016 21:26

As others have said it's not up to the company to decide he's self employed - that's a decision only HMRC can make.

He could become a sub-contractor, but there would have to be an actual contract to enable this. If no new contract has been signed, just talk or letters suggesting it, he is still employed by them. Speak to ACAS asap.

fascicle · 10/06/2016 07:13

wasonthelist
You've misinterpreted a lot of my post. I'd already referenced my interpretation of your I can 100% categorically state quote in response to OurBlanche's post. I was under no illusion that on site insurance was a legal requirement.

If a company doesn't use an insurance provider, but has a fund/budget set aside to pay for damage, then I would include that as a form of insurance.

For companies who choose to buy minimum insurance, and repair vehicles themselves, presumably there's still an obligation to notify their insurers of accidents, which will impact premiums.

RoastitBubblyJocks · 10/06/2016 09:06

For companies who choose to buy minimum insurance, and repair vehicles themselves, presumably there's still an obligation to notify their insurers of accidents, which will impact premiums.

Only if the accident involves a third party, which this one doesn't.

Flip

1 2 3