Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • tintin218
    • By tintin218 1st Sep 17, 12:47 PM
    • 3Posts
    • 0Thanks
    tintin218
    Airport Meet and Greet Driver / Insurance Database Query
    • #1
    • 1st Sep 17, 12:47 PM
    Airport Meet and Greet Driver / Insurance Database Query 1st Sep 17 at 12:47 PM
    Hi all,
    We used a meet and greet airport parking at London Heathrow recently, and on our return the driver got stopped by a nearby police patrol car (ie not a camera....) for speeding in our vehicle.
    Once stopped, the police checked their database to see if the car was insured, and the Police Computer Network database had no record of insurance for the car so they impounded the vehicle.

    Given this was 11pm on a saturday night, the police were unable to check with the Motor Insurance Bureau who would otherwise have been able to verify that the car is of course insured with a current and valid policy with a well known company and had been for several months (ie not a new policy or recent renewal...)

    Now we've been landed with a £50 taxi fare home and £150 fee for releasing the car from the pound the following morning.

    What i'm not clear on here is who is really at fault for the car being impounded specifically, and therefore who could I claim a refund from?

    The driver for the Meet&Greet parking company is clearly a prat, and is dealt with privately by the Police for the speeding offence and possible insurance issues depending on the cover he has.
    But, if the police were able to see that the vehicle was insured, they would not have impounded it and we would have been able to drive it home that night ourselves.

    As I understand it, we have done what we can in insuring the car as owners of the vehicle.

    Also, the Police did what they were supposed to do with the information available to them at the time.

    So the main issue is that the Police didnt have the right information available to them at the time. Is it up to the Insurers to update the relevant databases? is it up to the Police to update their database against the MIB database?

    Or is this a quirk of the system where we are extremely unlucky in that it was an 'out of hours' incident?

    Any advice on this matter would be gratefully received....

    Ian
Page 2
    • unforeseen
    • By unforeseen 3rd Sep 17, 10:53 AM
    • 1,831 Posts
    • 2,321 Thanks
    unforeseen
    It was probably impounded because the drivers insurance cover for the vehicle was dependant on the vehicle itself having insurance.

    No fault on the parking firm. If police caught him speeding then even if not speeding the car would have got pinged by their ANPR for no insurance.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 3rd Sep 17, 11:13 AM
    • 15,429 Posts
    • 13,759 Thanks
    AdrianC
    We used a meet and greet airport parking at London Heathrow recently, and on our return the driver got stopped by a nearby police patrol car (ie not a camera....) for speeding in our vehicle.
    Originally posted by tintin218
    Entirely the driver's problem. If this had been camera, rather than patrol car, then you would have simply returned the request to identify the driver with the MnG company named.

    Once stopped, the police checked their database to see if the car was insured, and the Police Computer Network database had no record of insurance for the car so they impounded the vehicle.
    That's entirely YOUR problem...

    Given this was 11pm on a saturday night, the police were unable to check with the Motor Insurance Bureau who would otherwise have been able to verify that the car is of course insured with a current and valid policy with a well known company and had been for several months (ie not a new policy or recent renewal...)
    This doesn't make a lot of sense. The driver could easily have proved he was covered by the MnG company's policy. If he'd done so, the car would not have been being driven whilst uninsured, so could not have been impounded.

    The question is why it showed up as not being covered from the registration - why was it not on MID, as the insurer are legally bound to ensure it is within 14 days of policy inception? Would the MnG driver have known who your insurer was, to enable them to call the correct people to verify your policy?

    The other question is why you've not been getting letters and penalties for breach of continuous insurance. This would suggest that the car HAD been on MID, but had been removed for some reason.

    Now we've been landed with a £50 taxi fare home and £150 fee for releasing the car from the pound the following morning.
    If the insurer have GENUINELY made an error, then you should be hassling them for recompense of those expenses.

    What i'm not clear on here is who is really at fault for the car being impounded specifically
    You are the registered keeper, therefore it's your responsibility to ensure the car is kept in compliance with all applicable legislation. It's easy to check that a car is on MID - www.askmid.co.uk
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 3rd Sep 17, 11:51 AM
    • 4,138 Posts
    • 3,624 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    I suspect that people are getting it wrong because of a misunderstanding or careless wording in the OP.

    After stopping the car, the police will have checked for appropriate insurance for the driver, not the car.

    If the company doesn't have insurance, or the driver isn't covered by it for any reason (possibly new, possibly undeclared points, possibly lots of other things) then the OP having insurance for themselves would make no difference and the car would be seized.
    • loskie
    • By loskie 3rd Sep 17, 1:41 PM
    • 1,144 Posts
    • 694 Thanks
    loskie
    we all know these meet and greet companies are shoddy, parking in streets, fields, using cars etc etc so likelyhood is they also did not bother with insurance.
    Why folks use these companies is beyond me.
    • tintin218
    • By tintin218 14th Sep 17, 9:25 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    tintin218
    Thanks to all those who have posted here, and apologies for this late reply.

    To clarify, it was our insurance policy on the car that the police were not able to find on their own police database (PCN i think its called). I was told by the police that the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB), ie the official car insurance industry database, was not available them out of hours. Whether the driver had suitable insurance or not is another matter that the police were investigating separately with him.

    The problem here really is that the MIB was not available to the Police at the time of the offence. Our insurance policy was recorded on the MIB, and it was on that basis that they were happy to release the car the following day, when it was available for them to interrogate in 'normal office hours'.

    So - the insurers had updated the MIB, and the police did what they could at the time. So why does the police database not match the MIB database? That is the key here I think.

    I'm off to write some letters...
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 14th Sep 17, 9:30 PM
    • 563 Posts
    • 295 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    Thanks to all those who have posted here, and apologies for this late reply.

    To clarify, it was our insurance policy on the car that the police were not able to find on their own police database (PCN i think its called). I was told by the police that the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB), ie the official car insurance industry database, was not available them out of hours. Whether the driver had suitable insurance or not is another matter that the police were investigating separately with him.

    The problem here really is that the MIB was not available to the Police at the time of the offence. Our insurance policy was recorded on the MIB, and it was on that basis that they were happy to release the car the following day, when it was available for them to interrogate in 'normal office hours'.

    So - the insurers had updated the MIB, and the police did what they could at the time. So why does the police database not match the MIB database? That is the key here I think.

    I'm off to write some letters...
    Originally posted by tintin218

    If your car was showing as insured on the MIB database then the PNC would be showing insurance. If the link between the two were down then they had no evidence it wasn't insured so something isn't adding up.
    • rudekid48
    • By rudekid48 14th Sep 17, 10:36 PM
    • 2,034 Posts
    • 3,522 Thanks
    rudekid48
    It's a database, it doesn't have office hours.
    All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 15th Sep 17, 8:25 AM
    • 15,429 Posts
    • 13,759 Thanks
    AdrianC
    It's a database, it doesn't have office hours.
    Originally posted by rudekid48
    It's easy for Joe Public to see what's on MID, 24x7
    askmid.com
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 15th Sep 17, 10:15 AM
    • 15,128 Posts
    • 14,763 Thanks
    Guest101
    Thanks to all those who have posted here, and apologies for this late reply.

    To clarify, it was our insurance policy on the car that the police were not able to find on their own police database (PCN i think its called). I was told by the police that the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB), ie the official car insurance industry database, was not available them out of hours. Whether the driver had suitable insurance or not is another matter that the police were investigating separately with him.

    The problem here really is that the MIB was not available to the Police at the time of the offence. Our insurance policy was recorded on the MIB, and it was on that basis that they were happy to release the car the following day, when it was available for them to interrogate in 'normal office hours'.

    So - the insurers had updated the MIB, and the police did what they could at the time. So why does the police database not match the MIB database? That is the key here I think.

    I'm off to write some letters...
    Originally posted by tintin218

    If your vehicle wasn't insured, would the police seize it if the driver at the time had adequate insurance? I'd suspect not, but happy to be corrected
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

102Posts Today

1,700Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I believe I can boldly go where no twitter poll has gone before https://t.co/HA0jC92gAK

  • OK I'm wilting to public pressure and there will be a star trek captain's poll at some point next week

  • I can get that. My order is 1. Picard 2. Janeway 3. Kirk. Too early to say where Lorca will end up (or would you? https://t.co/kawtCOe9RA

  • Follow Martin