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

dave82_2

Whilst I agree people have to take responsability for their own actions. Sometimes genuine mistakes do happen. So if the driver genuinly thought he was insured then I have some sympathy however he should probably just pay the fine and learn a lesson.

People saying the children were put at risk and he should be banned for life. I don't really see how haveing no insurance puts anyone at risk. Yes it causes huge problems if they have an accident but somone can be an idiot driver or a good driver with or without insurance.

Probably worse to have no MOT which again people forget about doesn't make them master criminals.

I do think anyone who intentionally drives uninsured should be punished. I guess what is hard is proving if it was a mistake or an attempt to get away with paying.

scheming_gypsy

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

how can i be in a hole? you said i was wrong but then followed up to say you didn't know. So you either know i'm wrong or you don't know of any insurer that does.

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.

you just told me i was wrong and then completely back tracked it to say that i could be right but you don't know about it.

Insurance companies do what's called 'laid up' insurance for when the car is off the road.. Which is possibly what you'd need if you had a car but no license. But like i've already said, i find it highly unlikely that an insurance company wouldn't insure you / your car just because you didn't have a license.

poppasmurf_bewdley

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

you just told me i was wrong and then completely back tracked it to say that i could be right but you don't know about it.

No. What I said was that no insurance company would issue an insurance policy to someone who did not hold a valid driving licence. I then said: although someone may know differently.

So do they? Can anyone come on this forum and tell us the name of an insurance company who would issue an insurance policy to someone who didn't hold a valid driving licence? They haven't so far, and I doubt very much anyone will.

I have just telephoned a friend who is an insurance broker, and posed him this question: Would my car insurance cover someone I lent my car to who did not hold, and had never held, a British driving licence? His answer was: "No way"!

scheming_gypsy

that's a different question though as you lending your car to somebody would say they're going to drive it. Although, come to think of it, i'm pretty sure you don't need a license to drive on a track but you can probably get insurance for that.

For the sake of curiosity, if you don't mind obviously... can you ask if there is a policy that somebody can get if they don't have a license.. because as i mentioned above, i can't see it being possible (or maybe logical) that you can't insure a car you have no intention of driving.

thenudeone

bigjl wrote: »

How dare somebidy carry their children in an uninsured car, somebody should phone social services.

I know this was phrased like this to make a specific point, but just for the record, if children are injured whilst in an uninsured car, they will be compensated by the MIB fund for uninsured claims, so they will not be financially worse off.

Hopefully the MIB will then sell the debt to a debt collection company who will quietly wait until the driver seems to be financially stable, then take them to court for every penny they've got, just as people are reporting on these forums.
Why should those who pay for their insurance have to fund the mistakes of those who haven't?

custardy

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

how can i be in a hole? you said i was wrong but then followed up to say you didn't know. So you either know i'm wrong or you don't know of any insurer that does.



you just told me i was wrong and then completely back tracked it to say that i could be right but you don't know about it.

Insurance companies do what's called 'laid up' insurance for when the car is off the road.. Which is possibly what you'd need if you had a car but no license. But like i've already said, i find it highly unlikely that an insurance company wouldn't insure you / your car just because you didn't have a license.

laid up insurance wouldn't meet the basic requirement of 3rd party cover
so wouldnt make the car legal to drive
so its moot as to whether the person paying the policy has or hasnt a valid licence given they wont be driving it

scheming_gypsy

custardy wrote: »

laid up insurance wouldn't meet the basic requirement of 3rd party cover
so wouldnt make the car legal to drive
so its moot as to whether the person paying the policy has or hasnt a valid licence given they wont be driving it

i think it took a few diversions. I originally said that you can insure a car if you didn't have a license - ie possibly a laid up policy.. Then it moved over to being insured to drive on a road if you don't have a license, which isn't what i initially said.
I don't dispute that you need to hold / have held a license to drive on insurance but poppasmurf was disagreeing in general... and then it moved on.

creeping_jesus

Sorry, but has no-one heard of askMID? I use it all the time, I'm just paranoid basically. It's free. I don't see how anyone could use the excuse that they didn't know if they were insured or not. It's not hard to google.

scheming_gypsy

probably because he thought he was insured till the plod told him he wasn't.
askMID is only useful if you want to see if a car has insurance on it, not to see who's insured to drive it.

ihateyes

darkwarrior wrote: »

I have to worry about my sister who feels ill because some !!!!!!! pulled her over to the side of the road and threatened to seize her car while she was there with her two baby boys.

Who's car is this, you mum' sour the sisters?
Who was driving, you or the sister?

im confused?