Uninsured drivers Options

[Hugh Saskin]

Just been reading that, in connection with the DfT's 'Scheme of Continuous Enforcement of Motor Insurance', regualar comparisons are to be undertaken between the DVLA database and motor insurers database with a view to reducing the number of people driving around without insurance. No bad thing, in my opinion. If you want to check and make sure your motor is on the latter's website, use this:


http://www.askmid.com/

Delighted to find that mine is on there!

[Berkshirelad]

Still unsure how this can work.

Under English law, there is no requirement whatsoever to insure a vehicle.

[Andy]

Still unsure how this can work.

Under English law, there is no requirement whatsoever to insure a vehicle.

It is an offence to drive a car, or allow others to drive it, without at least third party insurance whilst on the public highway (or public place Section 143(1)(a) RTA 1988 as amended 1991); however, no such legislation applies on private land.

[Strafin]

It is an offence to drive a car, or allow others to drive it, without at least third party insurance whilst on the public highway (or public place Section 143(1)(a) RTA 1988 as amended 1991); however, no such legislation applies on private land.

Unless you have deposited £500,000 with the accountant general of the supreme court according to Wikipedia, I haven't so am pleased to say mine was on the insurance website as well wen I checked

[regor]

I am not sure that i like this idea.

Imagine this.

I have a vehicle that is only ever used on private land. It is on the DVLA registration list however because at some time in the past it was used on the road. It is not insured and need not be.

However, because it will not be on the insurance data base there is now a danger that I may be required to prove that the vehicle is never on a public road. Quite impossible, one cannot prove a negative.

So the authorities will now claim the right to destroy my vehicle.

I know this is all a bit unlikely but it is as well to look at all the potential implications before accepting new laws and technologies.

[Iommi]

I am not sure that i like this idea. Imagine this. I have a vehicle that is only ever used on private land. It is on the DVLA registration list however because at some time in the past it was used on the road. It is not insured and need not be. However, because it will not be on the insurance data base there is now a danger that I may be required to prove that the vehicle is never on a public road. Quite impossible, one cannot prove a negative. So the authorities will now claim the right to destroy my vehicle. I know this is all a bit unlikely but it is as well to look at all the potential implications before accepting new laws and technologies.

If your vehicle remains on private land, then you have no problem.

[regor]

If your vehicle remains on private land, then you have no problem.

But how do I prove it has not been on the road?

[Strafin]

Unless as regor points out you get good old TVP, who need to hit their targets for the day, come round and request that proof that it's kept on private land. I see that as a reasonably likely scenario, if they knew it was there.

[Iommi]

But how do I prove it has not been on the road?

You don't have to prove it has not been on the road; just don't get caught on the road. I presume it has a SORN?

[Strafin]

You don't have to prove it has not been on the road; just don't get caught on the road. I presume it has a SORN?

Actually if it has been declared SORN that should eliminate any suspicion from the authorities.

[regor]

Actually if it has been declared SORN that should eliminate any suspicion from the authorities.

Sounds good, should work in theory but do DVLA, TVP etc automatically trust everyone who makes a SORN declaration? It should be OK if I obey the law and never let it go on the road.

Oh Bums! My jealous neighbour has dobbed me in to the cops and made a false allegation that I had it on the road last night.


I know - this could get silly but my original point I wanted to make was that not every new idea is fully thought through before being imposed on the population. Beware the hidden flaw in the small print.

[Iommi]

Sounds good, should work in theory but do DVLA, TVP etc automatically trust everyone who makes a SORN declaration? It should be OK if I obey the law and never let it go on the road. Oh Bums! My jealous neighbour has dobbed me in to the cops and made a false allegation that I had it on the road last night. I know - this could get silly but my original point I wanted to make was that not every new idea is fully thought through before being imposed on the population. Beware the hidden flaw in the small print.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think you need to worry. Just SORN it and don't get caught driving it off of private land.

[JeffG]

Unless you have deposited £500,000 with the accountant general of the supreme court according to Wikipedia

Well, we know that we must trust Wikipedia 100%!

From another entry:

Accountant General: formerly an officer in the English Court of Chancery. The office was abolished by the Chancery Funds Act of 1872.

Also, I didn't think we had a Supreme Court, but apparently we do now, and it's been in existence for 3 months (since 1st October 2009).

[Strafin]

Yeah, I think my smiley could have been better utilised!

[Berkshirelad]

It is an offence to drive a car, or allow others to drive it, without at least third party insurance whilst on the public highway (or public place Section 143(1)(a) RTA 1988 as amended 1991); however, no such legislation applies on private land.

Well somebody fell straight into the trap

If you actually read the s.143, you will see that it is the driver who must be insured. I repeat, there is no compulsion to insure a vehicle.

I can drive other vehicles not owned (or hired under HP) by me or otherwise insured on my insurance policy.

[Berkshirelad]

Unless as regor points out you get good old TVP, who need to hit their targets for the day, come round and request that proof that it's kept on private land. I see that as a reasonably likely scenario, if they knew it was there.

You don't have to prove anything. TVP must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the vehicle was on a public road.

[Iommi]

Still unsure how this can work. Under English law, there is no requirement whatsoever to insure a vehicle.

This still can be useful to find out if a car has a driver insured against it.

[Hugh Saskin]

Well somebody fell straight into the trap

If you actually read the s.143, you will see that it is the driver who must be insured. I repeat, there is no compulsion to insure a vehicle.

I can drive other vehicles not owned (or hired under HP) by me or otherwise insured on my insurance policy.

I can see the logic of what you are saying but there must be something wrong somewhere - why is it that the insurance documents always show the principal vehicle we are insured to drive, with the bit about any other vehicle (presumably with the owner's permission ) in small print at the bottom? When we trundle round to the Post Office to buy a tax disk (presume we do need one?), they always scrutinise the insurance doc to see it corresponds with the vehicle we wish to tax and I've never heard of a motorist having a blanket policy which authorises him to drive anything, including cars he owns.

[Iommi]

I've never heard of a motorist having a blanket policy which authorises him to drive anything, including cars he owns.

My fully comp on the car I own entitles me to drive any other car I don't own, but third party only.

[JeffG]

When we trundle round to the Post Office to buy a tax disk

Much simpler to do it on line with a few clicks: the DVLA database knows about insurance and whether a test certificate is needed.

Sadly, that's also one of the reasons that Post Offices are closing - they are less and less relevant to daily life.