boy racer ban

Chippy_Minton_2

dacouch wrote: »

As you well know being in Law and Order that the Insurer still has to pay out the claim under the RTA (This means they pay out claims for damage to third parties) even if they did have an exclusion about "Boy racer meetings". In fact they would still have to pay out under the RTA if the car was modified and the modifications were not declared. This is the basic principle of Motor Insurance

If they voided the policy they are likely to pursue the policy holder to repay them any costs they have paid out.

As I don't attend these meeting, what the insurance compainies decide is of little concern to me. Remember the basic principles can alway be changed.

I simlpy pointed out the fact. As the OP's son is under 30, he may have some problems convincing the insurance company he was not part of the "meeting".

motorguy

maninthestreet wrote: »

Accident statistics show middle aged drivers, both male and female, are the safest drivers.

Just because they have the least accidents, doesnt make them the safest drivers.

Chippy_Minton_2

pgilc1 wrote: »

Just because they have the least accidents, doesnt make them the safest drivers.

Go on explain your logic.

motorguy

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

Go on explain your logic.

Not having an accident does not make you a safe or good driver. I could not bother indicating for all of next year and not have an accident, but it would not mean i was a safe driver would it?

Also, someone slamming on their brakes to look for a parking space would mean a risk of someone driving into the back of them, which of course will be the person behinds fault.

.. and of course that person who didnt indicate will of course swear blind they did when they have an accident.

Or some old codger driving along at 25mph in a 60 is technically not breaking the law, but again its hardly being a safe or good driver?

cyclonebri1

So would you then go and ban all old codgers from the road?

Not aimed at the last poster, but just to emphasize the ludicracy of the blanket ban approach. You cannot fairly exclude any group by age, gender or skin colour, there are good and bad in every category

jeannieblue

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

So would you then go and ban all old codgers from the road?

Not aimed at the last poster, but just to emphasize the ludicracy of the blanket ban approach. You cannot fairly exclude any group by age, gender or skin colour, there are good and bad in every category

Couldn't have put it better myself (well I probably could've actually..)

Anyway......... I admire the OP for sticking up for the youngsters, even tho it was causing a problem for her son in law in getting access in to the car park to pick up his wife.

Bri baby - I meet complete idiots everyday on the road and most of them are not youngsters. Many of them are Scottish... :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

dacouch

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

As I don't attend these meeting, what the insurance compainies decide is of little concern to me. Remember the basic principles can alway be changed.

I simlpy pointed out the fact. As the OP's son is under 30, he may have some problems convincing the insurance company he was not part of the "meeting".

They cannot change the basic principle of the requirement of the RTA is that if they have an Insurance policy the Insurers have to pay the claim to the third party, they can recover their outlay from the policyholder if they do have the "Boy Racer" exclusion you refer to (Which I have never heard of) but they have to pay the claim to the third party

tandraig

can we get back on track here? do the police have the right to exclude certain social groups from driving on certain roads on one night? seems to me they dont.
i would suggest that one or a hundred of you boy/girl racers find a solicitor who wants publicity (but not money) to challenge this.
am sympathetic but not about to spend my own money!

goldspanners

tandraig wrote: »

can we get back on track here? do the police have the right to exclude certain social groups from driving on certain roads on one night? seems to me they dont.
i would suggest that one or a hundred of you boy/girl racers find a solicitor who wants publicity (but not money) to challenge this.
am sympathetic but not about to spend my own money!

so you want someone else to fight a battle you feel strongly enough about to post it on here,but dont want to pay for it yourself?

why not offer your advise to your son who has this problem and get him to pay for it as it directly affects him,or get him to find a free lawyer?

mountainofdebt

To be honest OP I think you are only sympathetic as a member of your family is being inconvenienced and not because you have sympathy for the youngesters

Blackwood was not a pleasant place to be on a thursday night; the area around the KFC / Halfords was a no go area.

Glad the police have taken action to be honest.