Legal Bods

[Harry Angstrom]

I reckon @duff_man is right.

 

[Hull_Mackem]

I not contesting that lack of insurance of the other car and will pay that fine, but my offence code states, "Offence wording: Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance" I had insurance. I know i'm screwed just clutching at straws really.

Just don't want you following bad advice from people on here and ending up with court costs and extra fine.

 

[Deleted User 2893]

I not contesting that lack of insurance of the other car and will pay that fine, but my offence code states, "Offence wording: Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance" I had insurance. I know i'm screwed just clutching at straws really.

Speak to your insurance company and explain to them how the policy lapsed, if it was the same company as last year then they might agree to cover you retrospectively. If they do then go to court and produce your wifes certificate and it will be withdrawn.

As it stands though you have committed the offence.

 

[squashjoe]

We had the same thing last year.
Wife drove her old car, which was uninsured.
Although her new one was, the other car was not. She thought it was
All cars must have their own insurance policy, you can’t carry it over.

Wife got six points and a hefty fine.

The penalty is way over the top as there, like you, was not any intent. But it has been ruined by all these pricks driving around uninsured.

Sorry mate

Interesting bit info here.
Can I drive someone else’s car?

 

[Deleted User 2893]

Look mate the fact that you can’t get over poor grammar tells me all I need to know. Why would it make a difference. You buy a cheap car drive a Ferrari on said insurance and crash the Ferrari ain’t covered mate. The same crash in the cheap car cost the insurance company more to the amount the cheap car is worth. You are right though not all policies cover this but it must clearly say. Twice I’ve been up for this once recently and twice the magistrates have rolled their eyes and kicked it out.


Totally different. Wife owned both cars.

It would make a difference because if that was allowed you would be driving legally with insurance on a ferrari when you have only paid for a fiesta, you really are struggling with this aren’t you?

 

[Hull_Mackem]

Wrong if you own the other vehicle you won’t be insured it’s on every policy.

Fair enough, I'll say legally the car is owned by my dad. The second car by my mum. The moped by my brother. Etc.

 

[beezer]

Rather than just taking the points and fine it might be better to go to court and explain what happened.

I wrongly believed years ago that a fully comp policy covered you to drive other vehicles. Turns out that it was only true if stated on the certificate. I got summoned to the magistrates, explained it was a misunderstanding on my part, and they were going to dismiss it, until some little woman down the front started up saying there’s still an offence been committed you can’t just let him off. In the end they gave me 6 points but no fine. I think I’d have preferred a fine and no points mind.

 

[Edinburgh Black Cat]

Who the fuck let's their car insurance auto renew? Mental

Most people are on auto renew

 

[the boot]

It would make a difference because if that was allowed you would be driving legally with insurance on a ferrari when you have only paid for a fiesta, you really are struggling with this aren’t you?

Ok

Rather than just taking the points and fine it might be better to go to court and explain what happened.

I wrongly believed years ago that a fully comp policy covered you to drive other vehicles. Turns out that it was only true if stated on the certificate. I got summoned to the magistrates, explained it was a misunderstanding on my part, and they were going to dismiss it, until some little woman down the front started up saying there’s still an offence been committed you can’t just let him off. In the end they gave me 6 points but no fine. I think I’d have preferred a fine and no points mind.

Clerk of the court. They are vicious.

Fair enough, I'll say legally the car is owned by my dad. The second car by my mum. The moped by my brother. Etc.

Yes it would work but you do realise that it’s 3rd party only so any crashes would not cover the cost of your own vehicles.

It’s only law to cover 3rd parties to be on the road. In this case 3rd parties were covered.
The rest is your own luxury.

Can I Drive Someone Else's Car? Driving Other Cars Cover

 

[Typhoonftm]

Rather than just taking the points and fine it might be better to go to court and explain what happened.

I wrongly believed years ago that a fully comp policy covered you to drive other vehicles. Turns out that it was only true if stated on the certificate. I got summoned to the magistrates, explained it was a misunderstanding on my part, and they were going to dismiss it, until some little woman down the front started up saying there’s still an offence been committed you can’t just let him off. In the end they gave me 6 points but no fine. I think I’d have preferred a fine and no points mind.

Did you not kick her in the ?

 

[beezer]

Did you not kick her in the

Haha I really felt like it. Thought I was doing well til she got involved.

 

[jedi_toaster]

I’d definitely go with @duff_man ’s advice here. If something is set in law then they’re not going to put it in the policy stipulations, that should be taken as a given. There’s probably nothing in your insurance about not deliberately running down pedestrians either, as it is against the law and you’re expected to know the law. Ignorance of the law is not a defence, as the saying goes.

I think the best advice has been to grovel to the insurance company and see if they can do anything retrospectively.

 

[Goat Eyes]

Rather than just taking the points and fine it might be better to go to court and explain what happened.

I wrongly believed years ago that a fully comp policy covered you to drive other vehicles. Turns out that it was only true if stated on the certificate. I got summoned to the magistrates, explained it was a misunderstanding on my part, and they were going to dismiss it, until some little woman down the front started up saying there’s still an offence been committed you can’t just let him off. In the end they gave me 6 points but no fine. I think I’d have preferred a fine and no points mind.

Hold up, so you’re telling him to go to court with it even though, in your own experience it won’t work?

Ignorance is not a defence.

 

[peachy]

Who the fuck let's their car insurance auto renew? Mental

Why is it mental?

 

[beezer]

Hold up, so you’re telling him to go to court with it even though, in your own experience it won’t work?

Ignorance is not a defence.

I said I ended up with points but no fine. It should have been both.

 

[the boot]

I’d definitely go with @duff_man ’s advice here. If something is set in law then they’re not going to put it in the policy stipulations, that should be taken as a given. There’s probably nothing in your insurance about not deliberately running down pedestrians either, as it is against the law and you’re expected to know the law. Ignorance of the law is not a defence, as the saying goes.

I think the best advice has been to grovel to the insurance company and see if they can do anything retrospectively.

Because if you run down a pedestrian on purpose the insurance policy would cover them.

 

[mickonline]

Both must be insured.

I am going to go to court as I will get the same penalty as somebody who knowing dives around in an uninsured car an the endorsement (something 10) with stay on my licence for 5 years.

I find it harsh, as although technically I'm guilty, it was done unknowingly and I had no reason to believe the car was not insured as I have the e-mail from Admiral telling me the insurance would auto renew.

 

[ebb]

This is what I'm going to try. The car wasn't sorn so plod had the right to take it from the drive. But while i was driving my NOC kicked in and I was driving third party. Therefore, hopefully, i can't be prosecuted for driving a uninsured vehicle.

It has to be insured to even park on a public road as an accident is defined as "owing to the presence of a motor vehicle". However it does not have to be insured to be on your drive. The sorn only applies if your not using it on a road. If the car was uplifted from the public road I would say fair enough but I'm not so sure it should have been uplifted from your drive.

 

[Man About Town]

Just admit you fucked up and pay up, don't burden the tax payer with court appearances.

 

[captain fatty]

Question for Duff Man
I was stopped a few years ago just by Weatherby Services for no insurance
My insurance was "auto renew" which had been for the previous 3 years, but as I had been issued a new bank card about a month before the insurance was due they (insurance company) were unable to get any money from my account.
I told the copper "I knew it was due but it just roll's over" his reply was "well it hasn't this time it expired 2 days ago" I gave him the company phone number and policy number who he called and confirmed everything I'd told him.
I said surely you can see its a genuine mistake can I put it in Weatherby Services and sort it out his reply "No mate it's more than my jobs worth" and it was siezed
Sorry for the long post
But the question is if there was no insurance policy on my car did the copper not then break the law by getting in and driving it?