Sold a car - buyer drove it off without insurance

Destination_..._?

Your priority and concern is v5 correctly filled in by you . Posted off by recorded delivery to dvla informing change of ownership . Please someone correct me , isn't their a section on v5 where you enter car mileage . Is that compulsory or not ?

Aretnap

VSynth wrote: »

It's up to the driver of a car that they are insured.

Someone who causes or permits another person to drive without insurance commits an offence too. (linky). The penalty is the same as for driving without insurance yourself. So if the OP handed over the key and allowed the other bloke to drive off knowing that he was uninsured then theoretically it might be possible to prosecute him for causing or permitting. It's not especially likely though.

mum2one

I've just chamged my car in Jan, and although there is a mileage box on the V5 its not compulsary to fill it in. x

Destination_..._?

If not compulsory , why is it on their ?

Aretnap

Destination_..._? wrote: »

If not compulsory , why is it on their ?

Because the DVLA would like the information, but parliament hasn't (yet) passed a law requiring you to give it to them.

Chopper_Read

Aretnap wrote: »

Someone who causes or permits another person to drive without insurance commits an offence too. (linky). The penalty is the same as for driving without insurance yourself. So if the OP handed over the key and allowed the other bloke to drive off knowing that he was uninsured then theoretically it might be possible to prosecute him for causing or permitting. It's not especially likely though.

The op is not in a position to permit the use of a vehicle once it is sold so no chance of him being prosecuted.

Aretnap

"I'm going to drive without insurance. I need a car. Can I have yours please?"

"Sure, that will be a thousand quid"

Sounds like permitting to me. I agree it's more tenuous if the seller has already agreed the sale before finding out that the buyer isn't going to get insurance. Not sure if the argument's ever been tested in court. AFAIK in practice causing or permitting charges tend to follow only where the owner is particularly culpable, or he police can't get the actual driver for one reason or another.

securityguy

Aretnap wrote: »

Someone who causes or permits another person to drive without insurance commits an offence too. (linky).

It might help to actually read the legislation, rather than post it as though it proves your point.

(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,

You've just sold it. You have got a receipt. It doesn't belong to you. End of.

Chopper_Read

Aretnap wrote: »

"I'm going to drive without insurance. I need a car. Can I have yours please?"

"Sure, that will be a thousand quid"

Sounds like permitting to me. I agree it's more tenuous if the seller has already agreed the sale before finding out that the buyer isn't going to get insurance. Not sure if the argument's ever been tested in court. AFAIK in practice causing or permitting charges tend to follow only where the owner is particularly culpable, or he police can't get the actual driver for one reason or another.

It's further rubbish you are posting. How can you permit or prevent someone driving their own car?

Aretnap

Chopper_Read wrote: »

It's further rubbish you are posting. How can you permit or prevent someone driving their own car?

You can prevent it by not selling it to him in the first place if you know he's about to drive it away uninsured. I'm not saying a court would definitely agree with my reading. It's a slightly tenuous argument, but I don't believe it'r rubbish.