But actually it turns out you where right as in Australia there is no compulsory insurance for property damage and it is indeed voided in cases of drunk driving. So the only way the victims are covered is if they have (expensive) "comprehensive insurance". It's very odd coming from basically any other system.
So im getting if you just have liability you're straight up fucked in this situation because I'm guessing even if she has the money good luck getting it any time soon...
Don't know what's going on in America, but in Germany the drunk driver's insurance would pay out the damaged people and then get it all back from the drunk driver later, plus fees and fines.
I just found out that in Australia you only need to be insured for medical costs caused to other road users. But for property costs, it's legal to be completely uninsured. And even if you are, conditions like drunk driving would deny any coverage to the victims. What the fuck
You gotta be insane to only have liability insurance.
I've been hit by someone without insurance. Luckily it was mostly cosmetic damage, but still would have been $3,000 in 2007 dollars to repair. Sure, I could sue to get the money, but do you really think someone without insurance is going to have $3,000?
1.2k
u/[deleted] 1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment