The mib is a company registered in England and Wales with a limited warranty. Insurers wishing to participate in car insurance in the UK must be members of the Mib and contribute to its financing28. This means that the final cost of operating the mib is the responsibility of all insurance customers who pay insurance premiums through insurance premiums. It is interesting to note that the requirement for insurers to contribute to the mib is the only part of the 1988 Highway Code (rta 1988) that contains mib.29. A person who wishes to receive compensation must meet the conditions of the mib agreements and submit his right to the mib. As members of the Mib, insurers can vote at meetings and appoint people to the mib technical committee. This underlines the control of members.30 In 2019, Cameron`s Supreme Court (SC) has been asked against Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd (Motor Insurers` Bureau intervening)  uksc 6 to decide whether a victim can sue an unidentified driver. In particular, the SC stated: “First, the traffic law is explicitly based on the principle that there is generally no direct liability for the insurer, except for its responsibility to comply with a judgment against the motorist after the stop… The Bureau`s availability of compensation makes it unnecessary to assume that a way must be found to make the insurer liable for the underlying injustice when the law limits its liability to the performance of judgments.” This underlines that there is no possibility of taking action against an untraceable driver, but that the victim must abide by the rules of Mib UtDA 2017, which offers a different approach for uda. This is an implicit criticism of the mib, in particular the voluntary nature of the agreements. The undersecretary`s response was that “these agreements have worked satisfactorily… I do not intend to review the agreements. 51 No criticism was made by the Under-Secretary of State regarding the voluntary nature of the agreements, the representation received and the number of complaints received. This therefore highlights a challenge in terms of transparency.
Information on how complaints are handled should be available to highlight all the potential problems and challenges faced by victims and the Mib. Transparency is discussed in more detail below. As the agreements between Mib and SoSfT are in place, it is not certain that there is state influence in this area. The mib is not self-regulating with the ability to determine whether and how it compensates victims. The relationship between the Mib and the state has been discussed several times, as the direct vertical effect of the directives can only be used against the state or its emanation. The Mib is a socially limited society and therefore raises the question of whether it is an “emanation of the state”.