Minor incident but im not insured!

Tilt

Paradigm wrote: »

I'm not sure this advice is accurate after reading the law.....

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/143

(3)A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of this section shall not be convicted if he proves—
(a)that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,
(b)that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and
(c)that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.

The bit in red seems to suggest that the driver of a company vehicle has no obligation to ensure that it's insured & that it's the employers responsibility/liability.

If conditions a, b, & c are met then the driver can't be convicted.

I wasn't giving advice. I was merely pointing out that not all the websites which Nikki provided were singing the same tune to what he/she was implying.

Tilt

Nicki wrote: »

No - it is a strict liability offence which means that intent to commit the offence is not required. These may all be special circumstances which would lead the court not to impose points on the license or any other penalty but would not prevent a conviction.

How can you have a conviction without a penalty?

Sgt_Pepper_2

Tilt wrote: »

How can you have a conviction without a penalty?

If you get done for no insurance and excess speed. You get convicted of both offences but often get no separate penalty for the lesser offence.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Tilt wrote: »

How can you have a conviction without a penalty?

Ever heard of a discharge?

Paradigm

Tilt wrote: »

I wasn't giving advice. I was merely pointing out that not all the websites which Nikki provided were singing the same tune to what he/she was implying.

I was referring to the advice on the website you quoted, not you.

Sorry if it seemed otherwise

dacouch

Newbury v Davis is a defence against the owner being convicted for aiding and abetting no insurance when they've lent the vehicle to a friend and it being lent "conditional" on the friend having appropriate insurance.

rdwarr

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

Yup, turned 40 this year. I've had 3rd party cover on other people's vehicles with their consent since 25 myself. I wouldn't bat an eye at borrowing a mate's pickup (if I had a mate with one), so I myself might have ended up being just as "guilty".

I can't remember ever having one that referred to "Driving Other Vehicles" and not "Driving Other Cars" (been driving 35 years). Even the generic term for this, "DOC Extension", gives a clue to what it actually covers.

Some companies have stopped doing these but I find it useful as I can drive the kids' cars when they haven't added me as a named driver (which they should as it makes their insurance cheaper).

Sgt_Pepper_2

rdwarr wrote: »

I can't remember ever having one that referred to "Driving Other Vehicles" and not "Driving Other Cars" (been driving 35 years). Even the generic term for this, "DOC Extension", gives a clue to what it actually covers.

Some companies have stopped doing these but I find it useful as I can drive the kids' cars when they haven't added me as a named driver (which they should as it makes their insurance cheaper).

Yeah in the past the wording was other vehicles. I had a car policy that gave me third party cover on bikes.

dacouch

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Yeah in the past the wording was other vehicles. I had a car policy that gave me third party cover on bikes.

If your wealthy, it's possible to get comprehensive driving other cars which is extended to all name drivers on your policy.

That would be handy.

vikingaero

dacouch wrote: »

If your wealthy, it's possible to get comprehensive driving other cars which is extended to all name drivers on your policy.

That would be handy.

You don't need to be wealthy.

We insure 11 cars as a family fleet. We used to use a Towergate Family Fleet Policy, but last year changed to Pace Ward. With Pace Ward any of us can drive any of the insured cars fully comp. And all named drivers have this extension too on 3rd party vehicles, also fully comp.

The cost was about £260 more than the Towergate policy where we had to hassle of calling up for temporary cover.