Insurance offence query

book12

When I was renewing my insurance last month, I saw a list of motoring offences for curiosity. I saw something interesting regarding insurance offences:

IN10 - using a vehicle uninsured against third party risks (i.e. driving without insurance)
IN12 - aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring IN10
IN14 - casuing or permitting IN10
IN16 - Inciting IN10

Most price comparison sites don't have IN12,14, & 16. Most of them only have IN10. Why is this? I checked the direct.gov and DVLA website, and there is no such thing as IN12, 14, & 16 insurance offence. Are those old offences, but the comparison site forgot to take them off?

I am also quite surprised that there is no offence, regarding using the wrong type of insurance for a vehicle (e.g. someone using a 'Social only' insurance policy, travelling to another clients site frequently for employment without having 'Business Use' insurance').

I'm just curious.

Foxy-Stoat_3

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/EndorsementsAndDisqualifications/DG_10022425

Clearly there are such things as an offence code ending in "2-4-6".

Most if not all conviction codes on the comparison sites end in "0" as they are the normal offences. You would have to ask an underwriter for an explaination as to why the "2-4-6" codes dont appear.

If you where caught driving with the wrong type of insurance cover then you would be prosocuted for no insurance (IN10).

Although years ago when I worked for an insurance broker we had a case where a nurse had an accident and she put on the accident claim form that she was travelling to different places of work and on the proposal form she stated she drove to and from one place of work. In the end they made her pay £25 to include for business use and that was that. I am sure nowadays they would of refused the claim and voided the policy and they would of got an IN10 conviction.

vikingaero

There may be conviction codes which no longer exist but still appear on quote sites because those convictions may still be valid even though the offence has changed or reworded.

Foxy-Stoat_3

Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring

Offences as coded, but with 0 changed to 2 eg LC10 becomes LC12.

Causing or permitting

Offences as coded, but with 0 changed to 4 eg LC10 becomes LC14.

Inciting

Offences as coded, but with the end 0 changed to 6 eg DD40 becomes DD46.

They DO exist!

book12

It's quite hard to get caught out with 'wrong type' of insurance. If got caught by police, the driver (with 'Social only' policy for example) can say that he/she is visiting a friend, but actually going to work. The police database in the car can detect the car is insured (but don't tell the 'type' of policy), and don't care what type of policy you have, and don't care where you are travelling to....

In fact, you can't get caught with wrong type of insurance, as the police database in the car can detect if a car has insurance, and won't get stopped. If NO insurance, you will get caught.

Loophole there. Please note, I don't condone using wrong type of insurance.

Yorkie1

book12 wrote: »

It's quite hard to get caught out with 'wrong type' of insurance. If got caught by police, the driver (with 'Social only' policy for example) can say that he/she is visiting a friend, but actually going to work. The police database in the car can detect the car is insured (but don't tell the 'type' of policy), and don't care what type of policy you have, and don't care where you are travelling to....

In fact, you can't get caught with wrong type of insurance, as the police database in the car can detect if a car has insurance, and won't get stopped. If NO insurance, you will get caught.

Loophole there. Please note, I don't condone using wrong type of insurance.

The 'loophole' is reliant on the police not bothering to check up on the driver's story. If they do decide to check up then it's too late to tell the truth by then and there's the risk of perverting the course of justice on top of no insurance.

Yes, most officers won't check - but you won't know whether they will until you've already lied to them.

The_Turner

Yorkie1 wrote: »

The 'loophole' is reliant on the police not bothering to check up on the driver's story. If they do decide to check up then it's too late to tell the truth by then and there's the risk of perverting the course of justice on top of no insurance.

Yes, most officers won't check - but you won't know whether they will until you've already lied to them.

I very much doubt that.

kizkiz

book12 wrote: »

It's quite hard to get caught out with 'wrong type' of insurance. If got caught by police, the driver (with 'Social only' policy for example) can say that he/she is visiting a friend, but actually going to work. The police database in the car can detect the car is insured (but don't tell the 'type' of policy), and don't care what type of policy you have, and don't care where you are travelling to....

In fact, you can't get caught with wrong type of insurance, as the police database in the car can detect if a car has insurance, and won't get stopped. If NO insurance, you will get caught.

Loophole there. Please note, I don't condone using wrong type of insurance.

It quite clearly states on pnc for most policies whether you are allowed to drive for business purposes. Not hard to see