MSE News: Compulsory car insurance moves a step closer

JimmyTheWig

Not sure how they're going to clamp anyone who falls foul of this law.
Hasn't it always been the case that a car parked on the road (whether driven or not) needs insurance.
So the new rules only apply to cars off the road.
I can't see how they'd be allowed to come onto someone's drive and clamp their car.

Rover_Driver

flashnazia wrote: »

I'm confused. I thought this had already come into operation already as it was discussed on here a few months back?

It's s.144A Road Traffic Act 1988 which was introduced on 3rd February and in force since 4th February.It seems that they are to begin enforcement in June.

ILW

Seems a pretty good idea to me, cannot see the downside as long as you are legal.

Arg

Apart from not stopping uninsured drivers while funding more red tape and ways to catch out anyone who's made a mistake?

bristol_pilot wrote: »

This will not tackle the real issue, which is that the fine for 'no insurance' is considerably cheaper than the insurance premium. Law-abiders may care about points, oiks don't. Driving without insurance ought to carry 6 months in jail, that will sort it.

Or you could have sensible insurance or no insurance at all.

davetrousers

This means that cars, motorbikes and motor homes must be continually insured and consumers will need to be especially aware of insurance lapsing while they are on holiday or in hospital.

This should of course say continuously.

Last year my Bike insurance was due to expire whilst I was on holiday. So I set up a new polcy to start the day I came back, so it was uninsured for 10 days. It was locked in my garage so how would it be clamped/immobilised?

ILW

Arg wrote: »

Apart from not stopping uninsured drivers while funding more red tape and ways to catch out anyone who's made a mistake?


Or you could have sensible insurance or no insurance at all.

Anyone who does not insure their car "by mistake" is a menace and deserves all they get.

Gorgeous_George

Just copy the number plates of a similar insured vehicle.

GG

molerat

ILW wrote: »

Anyone who does not insure their car "by mistake" is a menace and deserves all they get.

Watchdog this evening seems to have different views on this, it is often the insurance company who has not insured the car by mistake.

deutsch

davetrousers wrote: »

This should of course say continuously.

Last year my Bike insurance was due to expire whilst I was on holiday. So I set up a new polcy to start the day I came back, so it was uninsured for 10 days. It was locked in my garage so how would it be clamped/immobilised?

you'll probably get a fine in the post sent by the system automatically. then as with all fines, you'll have the right to appeal. eg...you sorned it but database was not updated or insured it but was not updated etc... genuine reasons shown by proof.

holiday excuse wouldn't work as they are sending every registered keeper notification of the law changes i think. big campaign etc just before it's all in force.

above it just what i think it will be...not 100% accurate...

rickbonar

Someone earlier makes the very good point of young drivers premiums being the thousands and the fine is only £100.

I suppose it's not a criminal offence either.. if a teenage driver has the option of paying £2500 to insure his/her £500 corsa and a possible but not too likely fine of £100 it's a bit of a no brainer what they're going to do.

The only way for these drivers is for dad or mum to put them on their insurance unless of they are very wealthy teenagers.

My problem with all this is the fact that despite vehicles becoming much harder to steal and much better safety features incorporated into the cars.
Also couple this with better patrolling of drunk drivers and in last 2 or 3 years MOT and insurance regulations can be much more easily enforced and policed. In other words it's become very difficult to drive without insurance or a valid MOT.

It begs a very obvious question here............:

Why is it then the premiums are rising year in year out ?...........surely they should be dropping significantly?..

Is it a case of shuffling losses on home insurance like in floods, winds etc onto the car owner??

I think it's time the government looked into the activities of the insurers and their legality as corporate fraud looks a distinct possibility!