Driving without insurance

HO87

birkee wrote: »

What about using an existing system?
3 months ban for no insurance, 3 instances of no insurance gets a lifetime driving ban?

I think most of us will know, that some people deliberately drive with no insurance, so a 3 month ban won't stop them. Three times though, and it will be illegal to even be in the driving seat. Should mount up pretty quickly. They won't even be able to register a car in their own name, because the DLVC will flag up a banned driver.

And the deterrent value here is where? What makes you think that those who currently drive without insurance dutifully register their cars with the DVLA? Effectively, all this proposal would do is to rack up further costs for the rest of society and ensure that those caught for uninsured use will face a second charge of disqualified driving.

Those responsible for serial uninsured use are, all to often, the same small minority (emphasis on "small") involved in a range of other anti-social activities. They will regard your proposed sanctions as nothing more than an occupational hazard and deal with them accordingly. The law holds no fear for them now and one can envisage that the possibility of being unable to register a car in their name would be akin to being mauled by a dead sheep, to coin a phrase.

Oopsadaisy

birkee wrote: »

What about using an existing system?
3 months ban for no insurance, 3 instances of no insurance gets a lifetime driving ban?

I think most of us will know, that some people deliberately drive with no insurance, so a 3 month ban won't stop them. Three times though, and it will be illegal to even be in the driving seat. Should mount up pretty quickly. They won't even be able to register a car in their own name, because the DLVC will flag up a banned driver.

Banned, no insurance, not registered, no tax....it matters not one single jot to the scum of the country. The reason is that they have [subconsciously] done a cost/benefit or risk/reward analysis.

They will ignore all actions as the risk of being caught or being done is far lower then the benefit of being able to drive around. Lets face it the sort of scum who do it are not likely to be happy to have to take 3 buses and 2 hrs to get to buy their drugs or sign on.

homeworkgirl

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Banned, no insurance, not registered, no tax....it matters not one single jot to the scum of the country. The reason is that they have [subconsciously] done a cost/benefit or risk/reward analysis.

They will ignore all actions as the risk of being caught or being done is far lower then the benefit of being able to drive around. Lets face it the sort of scum who do it are not likely to be happy to have to take 3 buses and 2 hrs to get to buy their drugs or sign on.

I totally agree with your comments regarding people who make a habit of breaking the law.

However please don't include under the heading of "scum" people like my friend who make a genuine mistake as let's face it, it could happen to any one of us, especially when not in the best of health.

birkee

HO87 wrote: »

And the deterrent value here is where? What makes you think that those who currently drive without insurance dutifully register their cars with the DVLA? Effectively, all this proposal would do is to rack up further costs for the rest of society and ensure that those caught for uninsured use will face a second charge of disqualified driving.

Those responsible for serial uninsured use are, all to often, the same small minority (emphasis on "small") involved in a range of other anti-social activities. They will regard your proposed sanctions as nothing more than an occupational hazard and deal with them accordingly. The law holds no fear for them now and one can envisage that the possibility of being unable to register a car in their name would be akin to being mauled by a dead sheep, to coin a phrase.

Because all unregistered cars will get removed from the roads.
No option now. Registered, taxed and insured, or compulsory SORN registered. If neither, then the DLVA will flag up an address to the Police. Sold the car and didn't report it? That's YOU in trouble too then.
They will need accomplices to get a car, who will then have problems getting insurance themselves if they are caught lending their car out, and the car will at least get impounded, if a disqualified driver is caught driving it.

And your answer to the problem is?

Oopsadaisy

homeworkgirl wrote: »

However please don't include under the heading of "scum" people like my friend who make a genuine mistake as let's face it, it could happen to any one of us, especially when not in the best of health.

If your friend had set up a cc autorenewal then they wouldn't have to 'remember' or 'make a decision when they can't'; I appreciate that's no solace at the moment but they should do it going forward.

I'd also suggest that if you friend is well enough to drive and otherwise maintain a car on the road they should be well enough to sort their insurance out. Presumably they are able to fill the car with petrol on a regular basis or do they continually run out of fuel because their ill health makes them unable to face it??

I hope your friend makes a speedy recovery.

birkee

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

If your friend had set up a cc autorenewal then they wouldn't have to 'remember' or 'make a decision when they can't'; I appreciate that's no solace at the moment but they should do it going forward.

I'd also suggest that if you friend is well enough to drive and otherwise maintain a car on the road they should be well enough to sort their insurance out. Presumably they are able to fill the car with petrol on a regular basis or do they continually run out of fuel because their ill health makes them unable to face it??

I hope your friend makes a speedy recovery.

Did you not see Watchdog last week?

Tesco using auto-renewal hadn't done so for a number of people, and they were driving round uninsured.
(Why did they not check to see why they had received no new certificate of insurance?.... Serves em right!)

Ban Auto-renewal !!!

HO87

With respect you didn't specify this in your post. Your original post spoke simply about people. But, heigh ho.

birkee wrote: »

Because all unregistered cars will get removed from the roads.

birkee wrote: »

No option now. Registered, taxed and insured, or compulsory SORN registered. If neither, then the DLVA will flag up an address to the Police.

This could only ever be effective if there was solid baseline data to work from and near 100% compliance in terms of registrations, transfers and disposals. The chances of that all occurring is pretty slim and with the number of vehicles now nominally "on the road" the situation is not going to be retrieved anytime soon, if at all. As far as insurance is concerned it is the driver - or potential driver - that is insured, not the vehicle and that is why the MIDAS database should only be regarded as indicative. Where, quite, are the additional police resources going to come from to make all of the enquiries generated by the DVLA?

birkee wrote: »

Sold the car and didn't report it? That's YOU in trouble too then. They will need accomplices to get a car, who will then have problems getting insurance themselves if they are caught lending their car out, and the car will at least get impounded, if a disqualified driver is caught driving it.

Again, this requires compliance and the minority we are proposing to deal with do not comply and not just as far as driving is concerned but usually in all other aspects of their interaction with the State.

They already have well trained accomplices all prepared to keep their mouths shut and/or lie as required and make substantial use of false identities that are shared as widely as their pool of vehicles. These "pool" vehicles are inevitably of low value and their loss, if seized or impounded, has little impact as they are so readily and easily replaced. As unpalatable as it is from a police perspective it is often easier to not work too hard to impound these vehicles because at least they are known and time is not lost during other enquiries in trying to identify the latest vehicle.

There really is very little the system can do that actually holds any fear for these people and even the ultimate sanction of imprisonment is regarded as just an uncomfortable inconvenience and an opportunity to cut down their habits.

birkee wrote: »

And your answer to the problem is?

Abolish the current vehicle registration, tax, insurance and testing regime and switch it for one that tackles the problem: vesting too much trust in the owner/driver.

All vehicles to be registered once a year (for a fee) and a year/month-based registration plate issued using similar colour coding to that used currently on excise discs. The plate would be single use i.e. it would be issued to the owner of the vehicle and could only be obtained from the DVLA. Plates could not be purchased, for example, from Halfords or the like and trailers and caravans would be separately licensable using the same basic system.

If during the course of the registration year the owner disposed of the vehicle he would have to surrender the plate and the new owner would have to apply for one in his name. This would enable real teeth to be given to registered keeper liability and make potentially illegal vehicles immediately identifiable.

In order to gain registration the owner must have three things. Firstly, he must have a driving licence and produce evidence of his identity. Drivers licence details would be shown on the registration document. Lose your licence and you must either surrender your car or prove that it has been transferred to another owner. Secondly, the owner must have had the vehicle tested for fitness within an appropriate time-scale and this would be recorded electronically and the registration document endorsed to show the relevant details and mileage. Lastly, he must then and there pay for compulsory state-provided third party insurance cover (this would effectively replace the vehicle excise disc payment) and again this would be recorded on the redesigned V5. All registration documents would show the complete history of the vehicle.

Company/fleet/lease car's registrations would have to show the name of the user or specifically identified as a "pool" vehicle, if this was relevant.

Nothing would be put in place to prevent owners from purchasing top-up insurance to protect the vehicle and other "comprehensive" risks - indeed it would be encouraged - but the basic system would ensure that a far greater proportion of vehicles were insured as compared with the current situation.

homeworkgirl

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

If your friend had set up a cc autorenewal then they wouldn't have to 'remember' or 'make a decision when they can't'; I appreciate that's no solace at the moment but they should do it going forward.

I'd also suggest that if you friend is well enough to drive and otherwise maintain a car on the road they should be well enough to sort their insurance out. Presumably they are able to fill the car with petrol on a regular basis or do they continually run out of fuel because their ill health makes them unable to face it??

I hope your friend makes a speedy recovery.

Depression affects memory sometimes. It is easy enough for anyone to put something aside and forget it but if your health is not 100% it is even easier. Just caring for her disabled husband day in day out is more than enough to think about. I am not making excuses for her but it would be nice if a few of you tried to be a bit more sympathetic to her plight.

birkee

HO87 wrote: »

Abolish the current vehicle registration, tax, insurance and testing regime and switch it for one that tackles the problem: vesting too much trust in the owner/driver.

All vehicles to be registered once a year (for a fee) and a year/month-based registration plate issued using similar colour coding to that used currently on excise discs. The plate would be single use i.e. it would be issued to the owner of the vehicle and could only be obtained from the DVLA. Plates could not be purchased, for example, from Halfords or the like and trailers and caravans would be separately licensable using the same basic system.

If during the course of the registration year the owner disposed of the vehicle he would have to surrender the plate and the new owner would have to apply for one in his name. This would enable real teeth to be given to registered keeper liability and make potentially illegal vehicles immediately identifiable.

In order to gain registration the owner must have three things. Firstly, he must have a driving licence and produce evidence of his identity. Drivers licence details would be shown on the registration document. Lose your licence and you must either surrender your car or prove that it has been transferred to another owner. Secondly, the owner must have had the vehicle tested for fitness within an appropriate time-scale and this would be recorded electronically and the registration document endorsed to show the relevant details and mileage. Lastly, he must then and there pay for compulsory state-provided third party insurance cover (this would effectively replace the vehicle excise disc payment) and again this would be recorded on the redesigned V5. All registration documents would show the complete history of the vehicle.

Company/fleet/lease car's registrations would have to show the name of the user or specifically identified as a "pool" vehicle, if this was relevant.

Nothing would be put in place to prevent owners from purchasing top-up insurance to protect the vehicle and other "comprehensive" risks - indeed it would be encouraged - but the basic system would ensure that a far greater proportion of vehicles were insured as compared with the current situation.

This IS a joke right?

They could NEVER change the system by this much, not in the time left for using fossile fuels.

Coupon-mad

birkee wrote: »

Did you not see Watchdog last week?

Tesco using auto-renewal hadn't done so for a number of people, and they were driving round uninsured.
(Why did they not check to see why they had received no new certificate of insurance?.... Serves em right!)

Ban Auto-renewal !!!

I hate auto-renewal as well!

But some companies send the new Cert of Insurance with the auto renewal paperwork, which only becomes 'live' if you do not cancel. I had this situation last time - was too busy to shop around as usual so stuck with the old company for once and never received any other letters after the renewal.

But my car was insured (I checked online, there's a website that tells you, can't recall which).