Strange Sigma Red letter

FireWyrm

Deleted User wrote: »

when I renewed my license at the post office, the lady at the counter said I could have still driven with it being out of date, so not sure about what the situation is about being out of date.

With respect...and you believed some 'lady' in the postoffice and so could potentially would have committed an offense on the basis of the advice given by some person with dubious grasp of the law?

The law is clear. Expired = invalid. Whether the insurance company would pay out is a matter of debate and clearly down to the individual circumstances of that situation, but why give them the opportunity to reject your claim and unilaterally cancel your policy for want of 20 minutes and £20 to get a renewal in the post. There are anecdotal stories of insurance companies paying out with expired licenses, but in almost all cases, the renewal was literally in the post and it was more technical than actual crime. The Law itself does not recognise the difference, the same way that driving a car without a valid tax disc is an offense regardless of whether the paper disc is in the post or not. From next year, this situation will change because paper discs are being discontinued in favour of a purely digital system, but for now, it is a crime for which you can be fined and receive points, just as you can receive points and a fine for an invalid license.

nottoolate

its legal to drive and doesnt invalidate insurance if its just the photocard that has expired

FireWyrm

nottoolate wrote: »

its legal to drive and doesnt invalidate insurance if its just the photocard that has expired

Sigh



source : http://www.postoffice.co.uk/uk-driving-licence-photocard-renewal-faqs

It MIGHT invalidate the insurance. It is entirely at the discretion of the insurance company whether they invalidate the policy or not upon confirmation that the photocard is invalid.

You may receive a £1000 fine for an invalid photocard, you may receive a fine and points for invalid insurance if the insurance company stick to the letter of the law and cancel the policy.

sourcrates

Holding an out-of-date or otherwise invalid licence does not remove your entitlement to drive but further action, including the possibility of a fine, can come about if you need to show your licence to a policeman, hire a car or commit a driving offence abroad.

Millions of drivers have an old name or address on their driving licence, and while this won’t affect their car insurance cover, having incorrect information on their licence puts them at risk of a large fine if their licence is ever checked by the police.

nottoolate

http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/blog/entry/legislation-expired-photos-do-not-invalidate-driving-licences/46025/

Michael Pace, partner and head of motor law and PI team, Andrew & Co LLP

Despite a new driving licence design coming into effect this month, there remains one area of it that’s still likely to cause drivers and fleet managers problems: the 10-year photograph expiry date.

This past year, in my capacity as a motoring law solicitor, I’ve heard of a number of instances where 4b on the licence has caused confusion. It’s the date at which your photo expires or, as the reverse of the licence puts it, ‘licence valid to’.

However, this is where the confusion starts as it suggests the licence itself expires on that date, which it doesn’t.

To find the actual expiry date, look at column 11 on the back of your licence where the date printed commonly coincides with your 70th birthday.

Worryingly, the ‘confusion’ has led to some police forces threatening to impound vehicles for not having valid driving licences, and to driving instructors turning away motorists from driver improvement courses because insurance companies claimed they were not covered without ‘valid’ licences.

Having contacted the DVLA, I can confirm that the date at 4b is when only the photo expires. Your licence remains valid until such time as the DVLA revokes it, and that requires written notice.

Contrary to some police officers, out-of-date photos do not invalidate licences.

The actual offence committed is failing to notify DVLA of up-to-date information, contrary to s.99.5 of the Road Traffic Act. Not, as has been suggested, ‘driving otherwise than in accordance with a driving licence’.

Failing to update your photo is a non-endorseable offence although it could carry a fine.

When carrying out annual checks of employees’ licences, fleet managers should ensure that photos are valid.

This will avoid the need for legal advice if an overzealous police officer attempts to seize the vehicle or, if following an accident, an insurer refuses to indemnify.

Companies could also face allegations of aiding and abetting if the offence is committed by employees driving on company business, whether in their own vehicle or a company one

nottoolate

anyway all this is to do with a vehicle not a license

chewy501 wrote: »

Hi all, I've had three letters through from Sigma Red DCA in the same day. They're addressed to me and with reference to 'a vehicle' that I had registered to that address. The problem is that I've never registered a vehicle to this address (although my licence is registered there) and my mother is in pretty serious debt. Has this debt transferred to me? I don't want to call the company in case I acknowledge the debt. Any help would be much appreciated.

kaideejee

I also received an odd letter from Sigma Red the other day with the same basic content "We are contacting you about a vehicle which has been registered to your address" with a DVLA/xxxxxxxx reference on it. I rang DVLA (0300 790 6813 and choose the option to make a payment, then they can look up any vehicle registrations for you) and checked that I have no outstanding penalties on any of my current or recent vehicles, then decided I needed to contact SR directly.

I eventually got through to Sigma Red on the phone (I asked for another letter via the contact form first but I guess it will take them weeks to get to that - hopefully they won't reopen it at that point...) and after taking my reference, name and address (stuff they already had) they asked for previous addresses, which I wasn't willing to give. I was put on hold for a few minutes then she came back and told me the address they're interested in, which is not one I've ever lived at. I told her I'd never heard of it, so she said they had the wrong person and would update their records. Hopefully that's the last I'll hear from them. It's funny that they accepted it so easily - I can only assume they were fishing for detail on something they knew very little about at this point and so they were by no means sure I was actually relevant.

One tip - though their website says that they are open 9am to 9pm, I've been on hold for 30 minutes twice after 6pm, whereas when I called at 09:03 today I got through to someone within about eight minutes.

Oh, and withhold your number if you do call, just in case it IS you that they're looking for

I was properly stressed about the letter and I feel much happier now, even if it was a little odd. Hopefully this might allay a little of the worry you might be feeling.

Kev