We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
URGENT. Does anyone know any insurance company that insures impounded cars?
Comments
-
Retrogamer wrote: »I think what was being implied is if your insurance company don't ask if your car is impounded and your policy says nothing about any restrictions on impounded cars then there is no reason to inform your insurance company of it, or for the police to check if you have.
Just as there is no requirement to inform them you like to drink at home on a night.
As long as you answer what is asked, there is no problem.Be happy...;)0 -
The only thing that's weird is why it was that hard to get insurance in the first place
You can basically get a policy in under 5 minutes from any of the major insurers... even with your busy schedule. Do you smoke? You could have done it in your fag break...
0 -
Nodding_Donkey wrote: »
If someone is driving the car legally under the 'driving other vehicles' section of their own policy this can be verified at the time of the stop.
Not in many cases0 -
Nodding_Donkey wrote: »Why, if you* allow someone to drive your car then it is up to you to make sure they are insured.
*generic 'you' not you personally
Or make loaning them the car conditional on them having insurance.0 -
spacey2012 wrote: »If the Nephew does not have insurance the test for prosecution in Magistrates is know as acting with due Diligence.
The test for prosecution in a Magistrates Court is 'beyond reasonable doubt', as far as insurance is concerned it is a strict liability matter - you are either insured (and have evidence of the insurance) or you are not insured.
Due diligence is to do with naming the driver - s.172 RTA 1988.0 -
Retrogamer wrote: »I think what was being implied is if your insurance company don't ask if your car is impounded and your policy says nothing about any restrictions on impounded cars then there is no reason to inform your insurance company of it, or for the police to check if you have.
yep, the only restriction I've ever seen about retrieving impounded cars is that my DOC cover can't be used for that purpose.
Any policy on the impounded car would be fine and, as you say, you don't need to volunteer anything not asked about.0 -
Due Diligence is a term to describe a range of "actions" acting with due diligence basically means, taking all reasonable precautions to prevent committal of the offence.
In IN12 offence, the test is Due diligence, well it is here, I can not speak for other areas.
What the magistrates accept as due diligence is advised by the Legal clerk based upon CPS guidelines.
What I can say is "They told me they had insurance" falls well short indeed.Be happy...;)0 -
Insurance is strict liability, either it is insured or isn't
There very few defences, employees driving employer's vehicles & Dacouch's "conditional permission" are the two that spring to mind.
Due diligence, checking certificates etc etc aren't defences. They might work as mitigation to reduce the penalty but they won't help in avoiding the conviction which will depend solely on whether insure was actually in place or not.0 -
If your insurance company is stating that you do have insurance and there are no clauses on your policy about not being covered when retrieving the vehicle from police impound and your insurance company doesn't ask about it i can't understand why you wouldn't be insured.All your base are belong to us.0
-
spacey2012 wrote: »What I can say is "They told me they had insurance" falls well short indeed.
In what context? If the CPS press causing/permitting charges on the RK, then it certainly isn't hard to see how it could affect proving that the RK is indeed guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" of permitting the vehicle to be driven uninsured. I suspect that the relationship between the RK and the driver would also come into play. If the two were close friends/relatives and had a strong relationship of trust, it would be sufficient. If the driver was unknown to the RK - say, was testdriving the car prior to purchase - then it's more debatable, and the RK would have been well advised to actually ask to see insurance paperwork.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards