Legal Bods

Status
Not open for further replies.


mickonline said:
Any legal bods on here tonight.

I've just been followed home by Plod. Popped to the local shop to get some milk in the wifes car and just found out because of an expired payment card, that her insurance had expired and not auto renewed.

Now my insurance clearly states I can drive any other car with the owners permission and has no stipulations that the car must be insured as well.

I'm not contesting having to pay to get the car out of the pound as technically while i was in the shop it was an uninsured car on the road, but should i contest my fine and points as when i was driving it was covered third party by my insurance?
Click to expand...

Although your policy covers you drive the vehicle, if it has no third party insurance, then you still can't drive it unfortunately. Your insurance doesn't cover that vehicle.

I take it you're not on a some sort of trade policy? you have standard insurance to drive another car with option to drive someone else's car with permission? Unfortunately if the car you were driving has no one insured on it, you can't drive it. If you're lucky and sort out insurance on the seized car and get it from the compound, the Police may cover the fees. That happens down my way, but it's discretional.
 
Vinny the Mackem said:
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.
Click to expand...

He was given a fixed penalty notice by the sounds of it, needs to fill in the back electing for a court appearance

the boot said:
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.


Nope.


Pardon


Wrong. Surprised though.
Click to expand...

He has been lucky that his insurance company were willing to do that, they didn’t have to and the vast majority wouldn’t.
 
Last edited:
MalmöMakem said:
Although your policy covers you drive the vehicle, if it has no third party insurance, then you still can't drive it unfortunately. Your insurance doesn't cover that vehicle.

I take it you're not on a some sort of trade policy? you have standard insurance to drive another car with option to drive someone else's car with permission? Unfortunately if the car you were driving has no one insured on it, you can't drive it. If you're lucky and sort out insurance on the seized car and get it from the compound, the Police may cover the fees. That happens down my way, but it's discretional.
Click to expand...

I've had it confirmed by my insurance company that if i had a bump in that car they would have paid the third party liability, therefore by default I was insured.
 
duff_man said:
He was given a fixed penalty notice by the sounds of it, needs to fill in the back electing for a court appearance



He has been lucky that his insurance company were willing to do that, they didn’t have to and the vast majority wouldn’t.
Click to expand...

They verbally told me on the telephone that while i was in the car my insurance covered it and that if i'd bumped the car they would have paid out, the third party element. They also mentioned that when i stepped out of the car it became uninsured. They sent down the section of my policy which covers driving other cars and I complied with all sections.

I've also been speaking to a magistrate today, as well as the desk sergeant who have both confirmed that it is the person who is covered, not the car. Therefore my insurance covered me to drive the car third party so no crime was committed as the offence is "using a car without third party insurance", the crime was against me not the car. The impounding the car for no insurance was the real punishment here, not convicting me.

pavarotti1980 said:
So the police are dropping the no insurance then? Or are you electing court and pleading not guilty?
Click to expand...

I've got to wait for the PC to come back to work on Thursday, it will be unto me to convince him to drop the charges. If not i go to court and plead special reasons which after speaking to a magistrate today they would throw it out as I was insured.
 
Last edited:
mickonline said:
They verbally told me on the telephone that while i was in the car my insurance covered it and that if i'd bumped the car they would have paid out, the third party element. They also mentioned that when i stepped out of the car it became uninsured. They sent down the section of my policy which covers driving other cars and I complied with all sections.

I've also been speaking to a magistrate today, as well as the desk sergeant who have both confirmed that it is the person who is covered, not the car. Therefore my insurance covered me to drive the car third party so no crime was committed as the offence is "using a car without third party insurance", the crime was against me not the car. The impounding the car for no insurance was the real punishment here, not convicting me.



I've got to wait for the PC to come back to work on Thursday, it will be unto me to convince him to drop the charges. If not i go to court and plead special reasons which after speaking to a magistrate today they would throw it out as I was insured.
Click to expand...
Without trying to rain on your parade you do know a magistrate has no legal qualifications?

I reckon this might have a bit more of a story to go yet
 
duff_man said:
He was given a fixed penalty notice by the sounds of it, needs to fill in the back electing for a court appearance



He has been lucky that his insurance company were willing to do that, they didn’t have to and the vast majority wouldn’t.
Click to expand...
Surely the police will have a mechanism to cancel the FP upon receipt of the documentary evidence? Seems a significant waste of time to force a costly prosecution. I'm presuming the RO (given the comments of the desk sergeant) hasn't yet submitted his report to the Crown.

However @mickonline, @duff_man has a good point here. You may need to elect a prosecution if you've been given a fixed penalty - don't let the time run out for the FP without knowing what's going to happen next. I don't know the fixed penalty system in England, but in Scotland, some become "deemed acceptances" so you might find yourself in a position of having evidence that would lead to you being found not guilty at trial, but because nothing had happened with the FP, you've already got the points and there's nothing you can do about it.
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Without trying to rain on your parade you do know a magistrate has no legal qualifications?

I reckon this might have a bit more of a story to go yet
Click to expand...

No but it would be a magistrate that any appeal would go in front of firstly.

Vinny the Mackem said:
Surely the police will have a mechanism to cancel the FP upon receipt of the documentary evidence? Seems a significant waste of time to force a costly prosecution. I'm presuming the RO (given the comments of the desk sergeant) hasn't yet submitted his report to the Crown.

However @mickonline, @duff_man has a good point here. You may need to elect a prosecution if you've been given a fixed penalty - don't let the time run out for the FP without knowing what's going to happen next. I don't know the fixed penalty system in England, but in Scotland, some become "deemed acceptances" so you might find yourself in a position of having evidence that would lead to you being found not guilty at trial, but because nothing had happened with the FP, you've already got the points and there's nothing you can do about it.
Click to expand...

I've got to wait for the PC to come back to work on Thursday. The desk sergeant has took my details for him to get in touch with me. Hopefully it will be solved then. The DS mentioned that I may still receive the FP notice but to plead not guilty.
 
Last edited:
mickonline said:
They verbally told me on the telephone that while i was in the car my insurance covered it and that if i'd bumped the car they would have paid out, the third party element. They also mentioned that when i stepped out of the car it became uninsured. They sent down the section of my policy which covers driving other cars and I complied with all sections.

I've also been speaking to a magistrate today, as well as the desk sergeant who have both confirmed that it is the person who is covered, not the car. Therefore my insurance covered me to drive the car third party so no crime was committed as the offence is "using a car without third party insurance", the crime was against me not the car. The impounding the car for no insurance was the real punishment here, not convicting me.



I've got to wait for the PC to come back to work on Thursday, it will be unto me to convince him to drop the charges. If not i go to court and plead special reasons which after speaking to a magistrate today they would throw it out as I was insured.
Click to expand...
You would only ask for a special reasons hearing if you are guilty of the offence, but feel that you can persuade the court not to impose points.

In your circumstance, if you can get that letter from the insurance company, you should plead not guilty and have a trial. You can still ask for a special reasons disposal even if you are found guilty.

Basically, the special reasons is only to persuade the court not to impose the points. You will still have the conviction and this will have an effect on any future insurance premiums.
 
the boot said:
I think the fact the insurance company told him he was insured is a good sign. But your right.
Click to expand...

You're right, I have to be careful. When I first contacted my insurance and asked if i was covered they said no. Which technically worded i wasn't. Once i asked the question would they have paid out if I'd had an accident they confirmed they would. (Third Party Insurance)
 
mickonline said:
I've had it confirmed by my insurance company that if i had a bump in that car they would have paid the third party liability, therefore by default I was insured.
Click to expand...

I will double check later, but I know a few insurance companies do it differently. Mine clearly states I can only drive another car with owner's permission if it has valid third party insurance on it.

Did you have your documents with you when you were stopped?
 
Vinny the Mackem said:
Surely the police will have a mechanism to cancel the FP upon receipt of the documentary evidence? Seems a significant waste of time to force a costly prosecution. I'm presuming the RO (given the comments of the desk sergeant) hasn't yet submitted his report to the Crown.

However @mickonline, @duff_man has a good point here. You may need to elect a prosecution if you've been given a fixed penalty - don't let the time run out for the FP without knowing what's going to happen next. I don't know the fixed penalty system in England, but in Scotland, some become "deemed acceptances" so you might find yourself in a position of having evidence that would lead to you being found not guilty at trial, but because nothing had happened with the FP, you've already got the points and there's nothing you can do about it.
Click to expand...

It’s similar down here, the FPN is deemed to be accepted unless you elect for court which has to be done within 28 days. The paperwork will already have been submitted to CJU but should be easy enough to cancel.

mickonline said:
They verbally told me on the telephone that while i was in the car my insurance covered it and that if i'd bumped the car they would have paid out, the third party element. They also mentioned that when i stepped out of the car it became uninsured. They sent down the section of my policy which covers driving other cars and I complied with all sections.

I've also been speaking to a magistrate today, as well as the desk sergeant who have both confirmed that it is the person who is covered, not the car. Therefore my insurance covered me to drive the car third party so no crime was committed as the offence is "using a car without third party insurance", the crime was against me not the car. The impounding the car for no insurance was the real punishment here, not convicting me.



I've got to wait for the PC to come back to work on Thursday, it will be unto me to convince him to drop the charges. If not i go to court and plead special reasons which after speaking to a magistrate today they would throw it out as I was insured.
Click to expand...

Sorry but the magistrate and sergeant are only partially correct, given that the magistrate has no legal training whatsoever that is hardly surprising.

Strictly speaking there is a difference between actually being insured and your insurance company paying out in the event of an accident, they aren’t the same thing in the circumstances you have said.

duff_man said:
It’s similar down here, the FPN is deemed to be accepted unless you elect for court which has to be done within 28 days. The paperwork will already have been submitted to CJU but should be easy enough to cancel.



Sorry but the magistrate and sergeant are only partially correct, given that the magistrate has no legal training whatsoever that is hardly surprising.

Strictly speaking there is a difference between actually being insured and your insurance company paying out in the event of an accident, they aren’t the same thing in the circumstances you have said.
Click to expand...

https://www.mib.org.uk/reducing-uninsured-driving/assisting-the-police

Under UK law, every vehicle on UK roads must be insured and the driver must also be covered by a valid insurance policy.
 
Last edited:
duff_man said:
It’s similar down here, the FPN is deemed to be accepted unless you elect for court which has to be done within 28 days. The paperwork will already have been submitted to CJU but should be easy enough to cancel.



Sorry but the magistrate and sergeant are only partially correct, given that the magistrate has no legal training whatsoever that is hardly surprising.

Strictly speaking there is a difference between actually being insured and your insurance company paying out in the event of an accident, they aren’t the same thing in the circumstances you have said.



https://www.mib.org.uk/reducing-uninsured-driving/assisting-the-police

Under UK law, every vehicle on UK roads must be insured and the driver must also be covered by a valid insurance policy.
Click to expand...

So, I've been given a fixed penalty for "using a vehicle without third party insurance". The crime is mine, not the cars. My insurance covers me for driving any car third party, i'm sure they said as soon as i steeped out of the car it was uninsured. In this case my insurance would have paid out for third party in the event of an accident. How can I be prosecuted for driving without insurance?

I just really need to get this clear in my head as i keep getting conflicting reports.
 
Last edited:
duff_man said:
He was given a fixed penalty notice by the sounds of it, needs to fill in the back electing for a court appearance



He has been lucky that his insurance company were willing to do that, they didn’t have to and the vast majority wouldn’t.
Click to expand...
Was good advice from you earlier in the thread Duffy.
 
MalmöMakem said:
I will double check later, but I know a few insurance companies do it differently. Mine clearly states I can only drive another car with owner's permission if it has valid third party insurance on it.

Did you have your documents with you when you were stopped?
Click to expand...

No, i had no reason to as I truly believed the car was insured. My policy does not state that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top