Legal Bods

Status
Not open for further replies.


mickonline said:
I've already held my hands up and admitted guilt but I've been digging and you can try for Special Circumstances, not as a legal defence but as an appeal to the court.



I'm Aviva, she was Admiral.
Click to expand...
You’ve already admitted guilt to the Police, I assume they read you your rights?
 
Of course, they knocked on the door and asked who’d just drove the car. I signed for the fixed penalty notice. Had no choice really unless I totally dented everything
 
duff_man said:
Policy in northumbria used to be traffic only can issue the seizure notice, that was 7 and a bit years ago though so not sure if it has changed
Click to expand...

Any cop can issue vehicle seizure. Response get a few. Even PCSOs can seize vehicles now for anti-social use
 
the boot said:
No mate. After vinnies post am back in the game. That’s what I did. Pleaded not guilty and my insurance said they would still have honoured my claim as my insurance would have paid third party, cost me £25 to get it in writing.
WDVTM.


You told him he was bang to rights. :lol:


Unless he is covered by his insurance which he will be. Which is what I said.
Click to expand...
Excellent news! Get a copy of that letter sent to the CPS asap, with a written authorisation that they can confirm its authenticity with your insurers. Make sure the letter covers the exact time of the offence before you send it on. Don't lose the original!

You might find that they'll discontinued any prosecution before it reaches a courtroom.
 
BlackOps said:
Any cop can issue vehicle seizure. Response get a few. Even PCSOs can seize vehicles now for anti-social use
Click to expand...

Thats different to 165 though, chief constables can delegate certain powers to PCSOs, what one can do in one force they may not be able to do in a neighbouring force.
Is that in Northumbria? When I was up there we on response could stop the car, identify the offence and write our statement but then had to call up a traffic unit to issue the actual seizure paperwork. It was a waste of time and one of the most pointless policies ever known, if it went to court it was the officer who stopped the car who got called to give evidence anyway.
 
Vinny the Mackem said:
Excellent news! Get a copy of that letter sent to the CPS asap, with a written authorisation that they can confirm its authenticity with your insurers. Make sure the letter covers the exact time of the offence before you send it on. Don't lose the original!

You might find that they'll discontinued any prosecution before it reaches a courtroom.
Click to expand...
That’s not the OP you’re replying to.
 
Alan BStard said:
Because there's a probability that the new premium would show a daft increase. You should shop around for car insurance each and every year.
Click to expand...
Ahhh....the best way is to set it to auto renew, shop around every year, if you find better change, if you don't then you are sorted without having to do anything more :cool:
 
mickonline said:
So her policy was cancelled, due to my situation at the time I missed the e-mail notification. We've moved address so telephone and letter did not reach us. With a genuine reason to believe I could drive it (e-mail confirmation)?
Click to expand...
Be careful if you have moved house without informing your insurance company. I'm not sure why you would move house, not notify companies and not get mail redirected mind. Also, who gives landline phone numbers out these days?!
 
duff_man said:
Thats different to 165 though, chief constables can delegate certain powers to PCSOs, what one can do in one force they may not be able to do in a neighbouring force.
Is that in Northumbria? When I was up there we on response could stop the car, identify the offence and write our statement but then had to call up a traffic unit to issue the actual seizure paperwork. It was a waste of time and one of the most pointless policies ever known, if it went to court it was the officer who stopped the car who got called to give evidence anyway.
Click to expand...

Durham all thats gone. We will seize as its used in commission of crime. PCSO will issue a traffic 184 to seize. Exactly same form but shrunk down
 
HarryChest said:
Be careful if you have moved house without informing your insurance company. I'm not sure why you would move house, not notify companies and not get mail redirected mind. Also, who gives landline phone numbers out these days?!
Click to expand...
Again, my insurance was moved but the Mrs hadn’t

Vinny the Mackem said:
If you do go down that line, you should also ask the Court to consider a short term disqualification - section 37 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. It is a disqualification of up to 56 days, which is obviously less pleasant than non-endorsement, but could be less painful than sitting on 6 points for the next 3 years. Court might not go for it, but they're not likely to consider this option if you don't ask. Again, you should explain the financial and personal impact etc and that Short Term Disqualification isn't an easy option for you but it is an option the Court has. So long as you aren't truly going to lose your job, of course, this can be a useful option.
Click to expand...

I must thank you again for all your help.

I've just had it confirmed, this morning, (i'm awaiting it in writing) that if I had an accident while driving the uninsured car my insurance company would have paid out the third party liability element of the crash. So by default does that squash the conviction of RT88191 "Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance"

Does this help or am i better just moving to special reasons?

mickonline said:
Again, my insurance was moved but the Mrs hadn’t



I must thank you again for all your help.

I've just had it confirmed, this morning, (i'm awaiting it in writing) that if I had an accident while driving the uninsured car my insurance company would have paid out the third party liability element of the crash. So by default does that squash the conviction of RT88191 "Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance"

Does this help or am i better just moving to special reasons?
Click to expand...

Just had it confirmed off the desk sergeant of Bishop Auckland that as long as I get the e-mail from Aviva confirming that they would have paid out the third party liability that I have done nothing wrong. The no insurance is a crime against me, I was driving a car on the road without third party insurance, but it now appears that i would have been covered third party in the event of an accident, so therefore the crime I'm being charged for does not exist.
 
Last edited:
mickonline said:
Again, my insurance was moved but the Mrs hadn’t



I must thank you again for all your help.

I've just had it confirmed, this morning, (i'm awaiting it in writing) that if I had an accident while driving the uninsured car my insurance company would have paid out the third party liability element of the crash. So by default does that squash the conviction of RT88191 "Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance"

Does this help or am i better just moving to special reasons?



Just had it confirmed off the desk sergeant of Bishop Auckland that as long as I get the e-mail from Aviva confirming that they would have paid out the third party liability that I have done nothing wrong. The no insurance is a crime against me, I was driving a car on the road without third party insurance, but it now appears that i would have been covered third party in the event of an accident, so therefore the crime I'm being charged for does not exist.
Click to expand...
No conviction yet, its not reached court. Get that letter urgently. Keep the pressure on the insurers to get it to you quick. If its being delayed, keep in touch with the plod. They may have certain time limits to carry out certain actions. If they do charge you before you get the letter, move onto the next stage by writing to the CPS with a copy of the letter plus your written permission that they can contact the insurer. Looks like it's all going to sort itself out though, if the insurers act quickly.
 
mickonline said:
Again, my insurance was moved but the Mrs hadn’t



I must thank you again for all your help.

I've just had it confirmed, this morning, (i'm awaiting it in writing) that if I had an accident while driving the uninsured car my insurance company would have paid out the third party liability element of the crash. So by default does that squash the conviction of RT88191 "Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without third party insurance"

Does this help or am i better just moving to special reasons?



Just had it confirmed off the desk sergeant of Bishop Auckland that as long as I get the e-mail from Aviva confirming that they would have paid out the third party liability that I have done nothing wrong. The no insurance is a crime against me, I was driving a car on the road without third party insurance, but it now appears that i would have been covered third party in the event of an accident, so therefore the crime I'm being charged for does not exist.
Click to expand...
I can’t wait for the apologies from the people who called me thick,
@monkeytassle @duff_man @my son@BlackOps @pavarotti1980

You boys just took a hell of a beating!!!!

Of course he was covered.

Sleepy said:
It’s her car and that car had no insurance. That’s the sticking point, no?
Click to expand...
Nope.

Kent_Mackem said:
This is the correct answer. I’ve seen three or four cases at magistrates’ court of just this occurrence.
Click to expand...
Pardon

sidneyeric said:
No, your third party cover does not cover your spouses car, you were uninsured.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Surprised though.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top