Fixed penelty notice for no insurance

sealion0000

Hi all,

Thanks in advance for any advice on the following situation. 

A few ago my uncle had a stroke and my family stepped to manage his business as the stroke left him unable. Then two weeks later my dad broke his hip.

I live away from the town the business is situated in, so my dad insured me on his car to make it easier to get to and from where I live to my home town to help with my dad's recovery, my uncles recovery, and managing the business. I've been going there almost weekend to help out. 

My dad then bought an automatic car in antipation of recovering to make it easier on his hip. He phoned his insurance to get himself and another named driver insured on the new car. This phone call happened when he was hospital after a fall about a month after initially breaking his hip. The insurance company have, unbeknownst to anyone, cancelled the insurance on the car I was driving and transferred myself to be named driver on the new car.

20 days ago I was stopped by the police in my home town for no insurance and given a conditional offer of fixed penalty, with 6 points and £300 fine. During the conversation with the police officer it became clear what had happened, and instead of taking the car away, he let me insure on the side of the road and drive away. 

I've been driving around with no insurance for 3 months. ANPR had previously pinged me and sent a letter to my dad (I forget the name of the letter) warning him the car is uninsured and to sort it out. This letter was lost in the chaos of the last few months, and only found by my sister after being stopped by the police. 

We are waiting for a recording of the conversation between my dad and the insurance company. Either my dad has got confused and it's his error, or the insurance company have made a mistake. Either way I believe I have grounds for mitigation for the points to be removed. Although it isn't ideal,  I'm not so bothered about the fine, it's just the points. 

I've 8 days left to either accept or reject the the conditional offer. As far as I've read, there is no mitigation, I can only accept or reject. 

My question is if I reject, is that indicating I'm not guilty? Because trchinally I am guilty of that, though I wasn't aware of it. If I reject, can I stand in the court and offer mitigating circumstances?

Any advice on this situation is much appreciated. 

sealion0000

Apologies, it meant to say "a few months ago"  

DullGreyGuy

sealion0000 said:
We are waiting for a recording of the conversation between my dad and the insurance company. Either my dad has got confused and it's his error, or the insurance company have made a mistake. Either way I believe I have grounds for mitigation for the points to be removed. Although it isn't ideal,  I'm not so bothered about the fine, it's just the points. 

I've 8 days left to either accept or reject the the conditional offer. As far as I've read, there is no mitigation, I can only accept or reject. 

My question is if I reject, is that indicating I'm not guilty? Because trchinally I am guilty of that, though I wasn't aware of it. If I reject, can I stand in the court and offer mitigating circumstances?

Any advice on this situation is much appreciated. 

Driving without insurance is a strict liability offence. 

There is a statutory defence if its a company vehicle and your employers failed to insure it.

Similarly if the insurer has made a mistake they will issue a letter of indemnity which means the vehicle was actually insured and so no offence was committed. This normally happens when agents miskey registration plates but there have been other occasions

Outside of that you have to argue Special Reasons which won't stop you being found guilty but may reduce/remove the points and/or fine. A parent telling a child they are insured is one of the most common ones used but it depends on the relations between the parties, order of events etc and so would be a gamble and you'd still have to declare the guilty conviction. 

Mark_d

You were driving uninsured.  You need to be insured and not knowing your insurance status is no excuse.
Your dad transferred the insurance to a new car.  Surely no-one thought he would be the main driver of both the old car and the new car at the same time?

sealion0000

DullGreyGuy said:

sealion0000 said:
We are waiting for a recording of the conversation between my dad and the insurance company. Either my dad has got confused and it's his error, or the insurance company have made a mistake. Either way I believe I have grounds for mitigation for the points to be removed. Although it isn't ideal,  I'm not so bothered about the fine, it's just the points. 

I've 8 days left to either accept or reject the the conditional offer. As far as I've read, there is no mitigation, I can only accept or reject. 

My question is if I reject, is that indicating I'm not guilty? Because trchinally I am guilty of that, though I wasn't aware of it. If I reject, can I stand in the court and offer mitigating circumstances?

Any advice on this situation is much appreciated. 

Driving without insurance is a strict liability offence. 

There is a statutory defence if its a company vehicle and your employers failed to insure it.

Similarly if the insurer has made a mistake they will issue a letter of indemnity which means the vehicle was actually insured and so no offence was committed. This normally happens when agents miskey registration plates but there have been other occasions

Outside of that you have to argue Special Reasons which won't stop you being found guilty but may reduce/remove the points and/or fine. A parent telling a child they are insured is one of the most common ones used but it depends on the relations between the parties, order of events etc and so would be a gamble and you'd still have to declare the guilty conviction. 

Thank you. 

The whole timeline is provable, so if arguing Special Reasons only costs me time and court fees, and will not increase my points or fine, I think it's worth the gamble to decrease the points. Do you agree with that?

sealion0000

Mark_d said:

You were driving uninsured.  You need to be insured and not knowing your insurance status is no excuse.
Your dad transferred the insurance to a new car.  Surely no-one thought he would be the main driver of both the old car and the new car at the same time?

This is why I am seeking advice as I'm aware that ignorance is no excuse for driving without insurance. I should have confirmed myself, an error I'll never make again.
Being named driver was a just a temporary solution the situation while it progressed. And unless it's legally questionable being the main driver of both cars, I don't believe that's a problem. 

DullGreyGuy

sealion0000 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

sealion0000 said:
We are waiting for a recording of the conversation between my dad and the insurance company. Either my dad has got confused and it's his error, or the insurance company have made a mistake. Either way I believe I have grounds for mitigation for the points to be removed. Although it isn't ideal,  I'm not so bothered about the fine, it's just the points. 

I've 8 days left to either accept or reject the the conditional offer. As far as I've read, there is no mitigation, I can only accept or reject. 

My question is if I reject, is that indicating I'm not guilty? Because trchinally I am guilty of that, though I wasn't aware of it. If I reject, can I stand in the court and offer mitigating circumstances?

Any advice on this situation is much appreciated. 

Driving without insurance is a strict liability offence. 

There is a statutory defence if its a company vehicle and your employers failed to insure it.

Similarly if the insurer has made a mistake they will issue a letter of indemnity which means the vehicle was actually insured and so no offence was committed. This normally happens when agents miskey registration plates but there have been other occasions

Outside of that you have to argue Special Reasons which won't stop you being found guilty but may reduce/remove the points and/or fine. A parent telling a child they are insured is one of the most common ones used but it depends on the relations between the parties, order of events etc and so would be a gamble and you'd still have to declare the guilty conviction. 

Thank you. 

The whole timeline is provable, so if arguing Special Reasons only costs me time and court fees, and will not increase my points or fine, I think it's worth the gamble to decrease the points. Do you agree with that?

Time, fees and you still get a conviction. If the gamble doesn't pay off then the points could go up, they could disqualify you and the fine becomes "unlimited". 

It's very much a personal choice on if the odds are worth the gamble. 

400ixl

So your dad lent you his car and added you as a named driver.
He then bought another car and transferred the insurance to that new vehicle (with a different but existing named driver).

That would clearly leave the car you were driving uninsured unless you took out your own policy. I don't see how transferring the policy to a new car can be unbeknown to anyone. 

Where is the special reason?

Are you trying to rely on your father meant to leave the existing policy in place and to buy a second policy for the new car?

By going to court and not taking the fixed penalty, whilst it may not increase the points, it will more than likely increase the fine significantly if you should lose as the fixed penalty no longer applies and they use a different mechanism.

Probably worth you posting on https://www.ftla.uk/ as that forum deals more motoring issues and will be able to advise if you really do have a special case to appeal.

fisherjim

As above having two cars needs two insurance schedules as both are different risks and the insurer should expect an increase in premium I cannot see how you can mitigate having no insurance I would take the fixed penalty, 6 points and £300 fine.

Going to court risks an unlimited fine and disqualification though that is unlikely it's your risk and your decision.

As 400ixl suggests you could take this to ftla for better advice but it probably won't be different.

sealion0000

400ixl said:

So your dad lent you his car and added you as a named driver.
He then bought another car and transferred the insurance to that new vehicle (with a different but existing named driver).

That would clearly leave the car you were driving uninsured unless you took out your own policy. I don't see how transferring the policy to a new car can be unbeknown to anyone. 

Where is the special reason?

Are you trying to rely on your father meant to leave the existing policy in place and to buy a second policy for the new car?

By going to court and not taking the fixed penalty, whilst it may not increase the points, it will more than likely increase the fine significantly if you should lose as the fixed penalty no longer applies and they use a 

It was supposed to be a new policy, which my dad thought he had sorted out. Or at least he told me he had. That's why we're waiting for the recording of the conversation with the insurance company to confirm what was said. The insurance company doesn't want to accept any wrong doing and have said they made it clear the policy was a transfer not a new one. That leaves me stuck in the middle, either my dad misuderstood, or the insurance company did. We'll see when we get the recording. 

Though its looking like the consequences of losing outweigh the win. I've got a few days before I need to act though, so I'll leave this open and post in the link you have provided. 

Thanks for the advice. 

fisherjim

sealion0000 said:

400ixl said:

So your dad lent you his car and added you as a named driver.
He then bought another car and transferred the insurance to that new vehicle (with a different but existing named driver).

That would clearly leave the car you were driving uninsured unless you took out your own policy. I don't see how transferring the policy to a new car can be unbeknown to anyone. 

Where is the special reason?

Are you trying to rely on your father meant to leave the existing policy in place and to buy a second policy for the new car?

By going to court and not taking the fixed penalty, whilst it may not increase the points, it will more than likely increase the fine significantly if you should lose as the fixed penalty no longer applies and they use a 

It was supposed to be a new policy, which my dad thought he had sorted out. Or at least he told me he had. That's why we're waiting for the recording of the conversation with the insurance company to confirm what was said. The insurance company doesn't want to accept any wrong doing and have said they made it clear the policy was a transfer not a new one. That leaves me stuck in the middle, either my dad misuderstood, or the insurance company did. We'll see when we get the recording. 

Though its looking like the consequences of losing outweigh the win. I've got a few days before I need to act though, so I'll leave this open and post in the link you have provided. 

Thanks for the advice. 

My documents, (and I have two cars insured with Admiral) are stored on line in my account, any change is stored there and is immediately notified by email.

If not an online account the detailed policy change, upgrade, renewal etc is sent in the post, you have not mentioned this, but the insurance company will have it on file.