Ask an expert

In the recent past AA has raised its opinion on compulsory third party car insurance. Today I read about a drunk steeling a taxi and driving it the wrong way on the motorway and damaging it. According to Stuff website the taxi owner does not have insurance and he was thinking of getting a third party insurance. My question is how are taxing allowed to conduct a business without appropriate insurance that covers public liability like injury to a paying passenger. Why should ACC or the tax payer allowed to foot the bill.

Its not a legal requirement for anyone to have property insurance (full or third party), although we understand most reputable taxi firms do have it. But ACC is paid from the annual rego and petrol tax so the taxi owner would have paid their share to cover injury costs. In this case the taxi owner would need to seek property damages from the thief via the small claims tribunal, and if the taxi had hit other property then the property owners' insurance company would seek compensation from the taxi owner.