No-claims discount proof

Igol

I'm dying to know under what legislation?

dacouch

Igol wrote: »

I dont have an issue with them asking me to prove it I have the problem with the incompetance that seems to go along with it.
The info is already there on the national insurance database which I assume they checked and then knew I had the NCD hence the reason I've never sent info before.

Theres no requirement to have insurance on a vehicle parked on a road/drive as long as its taxed there are no issues, unless someone hit it and then as its stationary it'd be the other drivers fault.

There is no national database that they can check no claims bonus on

raskazz

Igol wrote: »

I dont have an issue with them asking me to prove it I have the problem with the incompetance that seems to go along with it.
The info is already there on the national insurance database which I assume they checked and then knew I had the NCD hence the reason I've never sent info before.

There is no 'national insurance database' which contains details of an individual's NCD entitlement.

Igol wrote: »

Theres no requirement to have insurance on a vehicle parked on a road/drive as long as its taxed there are no issues, unless someone hit it and then as its stationary it'd be the other drivers fault.

There is a requirement, under the Road Traffic Act 1988.

System

why not just send them a copy of your renewal notice as it has your NCD on it .

Quentin

Igol wrote: »

I'm dying to know under what legislation?

Section 143 of the 1988 Road Traffic Act

luci

Whenever I have taken out car insurance online, it has asked for my previous insurer. They have obviously always got my NCD from them as I was never asked to provide it.

However this year I took out a policy with Aviva. My previous insurer was AIG and they weren't listed in the options in the drop down box so I had to select Other.

I then got a letter asking for proof of my NCD. AIG hadn't provided this with my renewal notice and I had to contact them for it. They said they couldn't provide it until my policy had expired so I had to wait a couple of weeks and explain this to Aviva as they wanted it within 7 days of receipt of their letter.

Igol

S143 RTA 1988 refers to 'use' of a vehicle.

There are no offences in having an un-insured vehicle sat on the public highway prodiving its not causing an obstruction or other decriminalised parking offence. If it has tax on it you dont even need an MOT.

If it was that easy I'd be doing 165 uplifts every day.

raskazz

Igol wrote: »

S143 RTA 1988 refers to 'use' of a vehicle.

There are no offences in having an un-insured vehicle sat on the public highway prodiving its not causing an obstruction or other decriminalised parking offence. If it has tax on it you dont even need an MOT.

If it was that easy I'd be doing 165 uplifts every day.

Incorrect. The Act does refer to 'use', but what you need to know is that 'use' does not equal 'driving' in terms of the Road Traffic Act. See the case law of Elliot v Gray and Plumbien v Vines. 'Use' includes merely being parked in the road.

olly300

Igol wrote: »

S143 RTA 1988 refers to 'use' of a vehicle.

There are no offences in having an un-insured vehicle sat on the public highway prodiving its not causing an obstruction or other decriminalised parking offence. If it has tax on it you dont even need an MOT.

If it was that easy I'd be doing 165 uplifts every day.

This case may be of interest -
http://www.rjerrard.co.uk/law/cases/pumb.htm

And the law is changing in regards to parked vehicles and MOTs.