Caught without insurance (didn't know it had expired) any recourse?

George_Michael

The motorway is a stretch of land that has condition to its use. One of those conditions is that pedestrians are excluded from its use.

In which case the highway code is giving illegal instructions as it advises you that in the event of a motorway breakdown you should exit the vehicle and move away from the carriageway.
maybe you had better write to the government and advise them of this.

Flyboy152

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

I'm afraid that this statement is totally incorrect. Every car insurance document will bear the words "provided the driver holds, has held, and is not prevented from holding, a current driving licence". In other words, for the insurance to be effective, the driver must hold a driving licence, or not be prevented (ie banned or not having passed the driving test) from holding a driving licence. Nobody who does not have a driving licence can have a valid car insurance in this country.

Nobody who does not have a driving licence can have valid insurance, to drive, in this country, I think is what you meant.

2gorgeousgirls

I understand it was a genuine mistake on the boyfriend's part but the suggestion that the police should have allowed him to drive home is ludicrous.

Imagine the headline if there had been an accident, "police stop uninsured driver and then allow him to drive home". Allowing someone to drive knowing they have no insurance would result in that officer being disciplined and possibly dismissed. He was doing his job, part of which is to stop uninsured drivers.

If your mum had 30 days cover and was waiting for boyfriend to supply drivers licence details to get full cover, why did it take him so long to provide it?

As I said, I understand he didn't realise the 30 day cover had run out but really people need to take responsibility for themselves. He knew he had to provide details for the insurance, he didn't. Your mum knew she only had 30 days cover and she didn't follow it up. Instead of blaming the police for doing their job, look closer to home.

The police would give a driver the opportunity to insure at the roadside (which it seems they did), call a friend, call a taxi whatever. They would not just leave someone standing at the side of the motorway, that in itself would be an offence as pedestrians are not allowed on the motorway.

s_b

Flyboy152 wrote: »

The motorway is not a "pubic place" in the strictest sense of how you are interpreting it. The motorway is a stretch of land that has condition to its use. One of those conditions is that pedestrians are excluded from its use.

I would have thought, that, with the apparent amount of miles you have said that you have driven on motorways, you would have noticed this sign:

scheming_gypsy

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

I'm afraid that this statement is totally incorrect. Every car insurance document will bear the words "provided the driver holds, has held, and is not prevented from holding, a current driving licence". In other words, for the insurance to be effective, the driver must hold a driving licence, or not be prevented (ie banned or not having passed the driving test) from holding a driving licence. Nobody who does not have a driving licence can have a valid car insurance in this country.

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Nobody who does not have a driving licence can have valid insurance, to drive, in this country, I think is what you meant.

which would mean i was right

thenudeone

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Nobody who does not have a driving licence can have valid insurance, to drive, in this country, I think is what you meant.

To Flyboy152 and poppasmurf_bewdley - Both of you are wrong.

There is no requirement to have a current driving licence in order to be covered by motor insurance.

My Aviva certificate states:

Permitted drivers
As below provided that the person holds a licence to drive the car or has held and is not disqualified from holding or obtaining such a licence

So as long as you have held a licence at any time in the past, and are not prevented from obtaining one, you can still be covered by insurance.
How many people continue driving after age 70 without renewing their licence? they are driving without a licence but, at least if they are insured with Aviva, they are still insured.

poppasmurf_bewdley

Originally Posted by scheming_gypsy
why did he have to provide it at any time? Having a driving license isn't a requirement of having insurance, having a driving license is a requirement of being allowed to drive but you don't need a license to be insured and you definitely don't need to provide details.

Sorry, but I disagree with you. I've highlighted in bold the main incorrect statement you made. You cannot legally drive insured in this country without a licence, except that you can legally drive insured if you HAVE HELD a licence but have forgotten to renew it and are not prevented from renewing it (ie not banned).

I don't know of any car insurance company who would issue a car insurance policy to someone who did not hold either a full or provisional driving licence, although someone may know differently.

scheming_gypsy

How can it be incorrect if you follow up and say that you don't know of an insurance company......
surely you're actually saying that you don't know if i'm right or wrong?

scheming_gypsy

Just to clarify.. If you bought / won / inherited a car but didn't have a driving license, then i can't see an insurance company not insuring it just because the owner doesn't have a license. There'll be some kind of policy that will let you keep a car insured for fire and theft if you don't have a license.

poppasmurf_bewdley

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

How can it be incorrect if you follow up and say that you don't know of an insurance company......
surely you're actually saying that you don't know if i'm right or wrong?

When you're in a hole, stop digging.