urgent advice needed please

Wig

cajef wrote: »

Actually unknowingly he has obtained a tax disc illegally, as on the form for renewing the vehicle licence it states that you must produce:-

Yes, and the keyword there is "unknowingly", what I said was correct, I was just telling the other poster there was no confusion, as far he was concerned he had a valid ins cert, and used it to tax his car. end of.

Wig

fishingcinema wrote: »

they were going to my fathers address

ALARM BELLS

Why is the policy at the fathers address, and apparently the boy lives somewhere else? I hope the keepers address is specified on the policy aswell, otherwise that is another crime committed.

alanrowell

It seems to me that with every breath he takes, the "brother" is digging himself deeper into the mire as there is now evidence of several crimes. Has the brother considered pretending to be dead?

unsure

I think the advice to talk to a solicitor ( start with Citizen's Advice Bureau if money is an issue) is pretty crucial.
My understandinfg is that polcie currently still need a reason to stop a motorist and cannot carry out "random checks", in fact I heard an item on the radio this evening to say that they were seeking such powers.
I am very confused as to how the driver has failed to notice either that he has not paid for any insurance or that, alternatively, he has recived a refund for a cancelled policy from his insurance company.
It all sounds a bit strange... see first point above.

raskazz

unsure wrote: »

My understandinfg is that polcie currently still need a reason to stop a motorist and cannot carry out "random checks", in fact I heard an item on the radio this evening to say that they were seeking such powers.

The reason they stopped him would be that the vehicle would be not be showing a match on the MID as having insurance inforce. Hence the need to ascertain whether the driver is covered or not.

Wig

they

raskazz wrote: »

The reason they stopped him would be that the vehicle would be not be showing a match on the MID as having insurance inforce. Hence the need to ascertain whether the driver is covered or not.

Hence, why the first thing the police said was "You're not insured".

He must have been stopped by a traffic cop, as I think they are the only ones with ANPR cameras onboard.

fishingcinema

yes this probably is a deffence that people who actualy dont bother with insurance try to use but as i said he would not as he has 2 babys this is something i know he would not risk

as being guilty for fraud dl knew that our fathers address was a c/o address as he had a messy break up and was staying at different friends addresses
not because we live in a high risk area we live on an island one way on one way off hardly never any trouble as most of the time police sit in a petrol station on the way on/off the island trying to catch speeding motorists

i did not take your last post as harsh but can see peoples point as the way you have worded the two posts seems like you are trying to imply he knew
mabey im wrong:o

Conor wrote: »

thescouselander wrote: »

I think thats a but harsh really.
quote]

Why? Where was I having a go at him? Are you some kind of Southern / Scouse hybrid? A kind of "scoutherner"? You must be if you're so bereft of character that you think that was having a go. That's the kind of comment I'd expect a shandy drinker to come out with.

I was merely pointing out the situation his brother is in. Do you honestly not think that this is a defence that those who really haven't bothered with insurance have used? It is. A lot. Guilty or not - only he knows the truth - he'll go to court and say he didn't get the letters as plenty of people have claimed in the past. The judge will probably have a statement from DL saying they sent it. It's pretty much a guarantee that there's going to be a guilty verdict so what is important is figuring out how to minimise the damage and if there's any possibility of still retaining his licence if this happens.

As alanrowell has pointed out quite correctly, technically his brother is guilty of fraud by making a false statement in regards to his residential address - something that's sometimes done by people who live in a high risk area to reduce their premiums such as people living in the less desirable areas of London.

So really, I suppose the choice is:

1) Take the points and keep shtum about not living at the address he gave the insurance company and chalk it up to experience.
2) Claim that they were sent to his fathers address, the address he gave the insurance company, which is completely different to where he lives then face a possible criminal charge for fraud for making a false statement. And he'll still get the points but will have a criminal conviction as well.

fishingcinema

cajef wrote: »

This does not make sense, how did he manage to tax the car this month, if he had no insurance.

he had what he thought was a valid certificate obveiously now knows it was not