Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Guy
    • By MSE Guy 14th Feb 11, 4:38 PM
    • 1,628Posts
    • 1,255Thanks
    MSE Guy
    MSE News: Warning over new compulsory car insurance rules
    • #1
    • 14th Feb 11, 4:38 PM
    MSE News: Warning over new compulsory car insurance rules 14th Feb 11 at 4:38 PM
    This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

    "All motorists in Great Britain will have to insure their vehicle unless it is formally declared off-road ..."

Page 2
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 15th Feb 11, 7:39 AM
    • 39,411 Posts
    • 23,390 Thanks
    Quentin
    The MSE article says that caravans will also be effected by this legislation, How ?
    Originally posted by BAA1
    Just scaremongering! (Or did the article mean "motor caravans"?)

    Caravans do not have to be insured to take them on the road!
    Last edited by MSE Guy; 15-02-2011 at 2:30 PM.
    • roddydogs
    • By roddydogs 15th Feb 11, 7:52 AM
    • 6,247 Posts
    • 2,671 Thanks
    roddydogs
    "Im not safe to drive much of the time??
    Last edited by roddydogs; 15-02-2011 at 7:54 AM.
  • GM86
    First off, long term reader but this is my first post, love the site!

    This really annoys me, not for the same reasons above but as I buy and sell cars occasionally to boost my income.

    I would see a car at a good price with MOT and Tax, insure it for the day and drive it home, where I would fix it up if required until it was sold for a small profit.

    This was a great extra revenue stream, however with the new laws my business plan and my hobby are out the window.

    Will they bring out a new type of policy which covers the car only at £50 per year, as a car which isn't driven no other statistic, such as drivers age, should be taken into consideration.
    • Andy L
    • By Andy L 15th Feb 11, 8:13 AM
    • 9,854 Posts
    • 8,911 Thanks
    Andy L
    First off, long term reader but this is my first post, love the site!

    This really annoys me, not for the same reasons above but as I buy and sell cars occasionally to boost my income.

    I would see a car at a good price with MOT and Tax, insure it for the day and drive it home, where I would fix it up if required until it was sold for a small profit.
    Originally posted by GM86
    Assuming its uninsured, then somewhere off-road like you should be doing currently
    • rogerblack
    • By rogerblack 15th Feb 11, 9:56 AM
    • 9,273 Posts
    • 9,438 Thanks
    rogerblack
    The Insurance Requirement - s.144A Road Traffic Act 1988 - has been in force since 4th February.

    The Road Safety Act 2006 (Commencement No.6) Order 2011, refers ,
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    I attempted to read the Road Traffic Act 2008, 144b - and my head exploded.
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/49/section/22

    More seriously - I was looking at if there are any loopholes.
    (I assume not, but reading legislation is always fun).

    144b (1-4) are exceptions for vehicles owned or operated by various public bodies, or for people who have sold vehicles.

    Clause 5 confuses me.
    5c says "
    (c)the registered keeper has by the relevant time complied with any requirements under subsection (7)(a) below that he is required to have complied with by the relevant or any earlier time."


    "
    (7)Regulations may make provision—
    (a)for the purposes of subsection (4)(b) and (5)(c) above, requiring a person in whose name a vehicle is registered to furnish such particulars and make such declarations as may be prescribed, and to do so at such times and in such manner as may be prescribed, and"


    I fail to find any legislation (as yet) detailing what these declarations are.
    Is this intended to be where you've notified them that the vehicle is crushed?
    • rogerblack
    • By rogerblack 15th Feb 11, 10:01 AM
    • 9,273 Posts
    • 9,438 Thanks
    rogerblack
    Assuming its uninsured, then somewhere off-road like you should be doing currently
    Originally posted by Andy L
    That's the whole point - the new legislation will require the old owner to pay for insurance - even if it's stored off-road, or cancel the car tax, and SORN it.

    Then the new owner, even if they wish to repair it off-road is required to do the same.

    It also means that if you are repairing a car for some time, have SORNd it as required, and now want to test drive it, to see if you've got the bugs out, it's now much more expensive, as you need to pay a months road-tax as well as a days insurance.
    • Andy L
    • By Andy L 15th Feb 11, 11:12 AM
    • 9,854 Posts
    • 8,911 Thanks
    Andy L
    That's the whole point - the new legislation will require the old owner to pay for insurance - even if it's stored off-road, or cancel the car tax, and SORN it.

    Then the new owner, even if they wish to repair it off-road is required to do the same.

    It also means that if you are repairing a car for some time, have SORNd it as required, and now want to test drive it, to see if you've got the bugs out, it's now much more expensive, as you need to pay a months road-tax as well as a days insurance.
    Originally posted by rogerblack
    I read GM86's post to mean he's currently keeping uninsured (but taxed) cars on the road while he fixes them up, which is naughty but currently unlikely to be found out. With the new legislation he'd be caught out.
  • ILW
    Me, for one.


    I'm not claiming a large number of people are in my position, however, the government suddenly deciding I have to pay a couple of hundred pounds extra a year, with no benefit to anyone other than the insurance companies, stings a bit.

    I am quite capable of maintaining my garage to make the chances of the roof falling in vanishingly small.

    Someone stealing it is indeed a real possibility - from a locked garage in a low crime area, with a 1.0l car with an immobiliser.
    If someone steals it, and causes an accident, they would not be covered by any insurance.
    Insurance would only kick in once they get out of the vehicle, and if they've left it in a public place, I would indeed have committed an offence.

    I find this to be vanishingly unlikely enough, that I'm quite happy to take the risk, as I do now.

    This risk still applies to SORN'd cars, of course.

    I will now be required, if I wish to use the car every couple of weeks, to get it continually insured.
    I was previously able to get it insured on a day-day basis, at a considerable saving, with the car remaining in a locked garage in between periods of insurance.

    A bit of googling finds: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/20/pdfs/uksiem_20110020_en.pdf - this is the explanatory note to the statutory instrument amending the road traffic act to get it into a state where the next instrument can bring those provisions into force by setting enforcement actions.
    Originally posted by rogerblack
    Surely just a policy with a very low mileage limit would sort the problem.
  • taxi73
    I didn't even know you could buy 1 day policies.
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 15th Feb 11, 12:06 PM
    • 1,413 Posts
    • 641 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    I attempted to read the Road Traffic Act 2008, 144b - and my head exploded.

    144b (1-4) are exceptions for vehicles owned or operated by various public bodies, or for people who have sold vehicles.

    Clause 5 confuses me.
    5c says "
    (c)the registered keeper has by the relevant time complied with any requirements under subsection (7)(a) below that he is required to have complied with by the relevant or any earlier time."

    (7)Regulations may make provision—
    (a)for the purposes of subsection (4)(b) and (5)(c) above, requiring a person in whose name a vehicle is registered to furnish such particulars and make such declarations as may be prescribed, and to do so at such times and in such manner as may be prescribed, and"


    I fail to find any legislation (as yet) detailing what these declarations are.
    Originally posted by rogerblack
    Does this help, the explanatory notes from the original legislation - Road Safety Act 2006:


    These provisions provide for a new scheme intended to combat uninsured driving.

    Section 22 inserts new sections 144A, 144B, 144C, 144D and 159A into the RTA and makes a number of consequential amendments to the RTOA. Schedule 5 inserts a new schedule - Schedule 2A to the RTA.

    Section 143 of the RTA makes it an offence to use a vehicle on a road or other public place without a policy of insurance or security against third party liability as required by Part 6 of the RTA. The new scheme will create a new offence of being the registered keeper of a vehicle the use of which is not insured against third party liability as required by Part 6 of the RTA. It will therefore be possible to detect the new offence from records of registered keepers held by DVLA and insurance records.

    Section 144A creates the new offence which arises when a vehicle does not meet the insurance requirements. Under the insurance requirements the registration mark of a vehicle, or the vehicle's owner, must be specified in an insurance policy or security. There are a number of exceptions to the offence set out in the new section 144B. Some of these are similar to the exceptions in section 144 of the RTA which apply to the section 143 offence of using a vehicle without insurance. They include vehicles owned by local authorities, the police and the National Health Service. Other exceptions may apply where the vehicle is no longer kept by the registered keeper; it is not kept for use on a road or other public place or has been stolen. The exceptions apply only if a prior statement (such as a statutory off-road "SORN" declaration) has been made to the appropriate authorities as required by regulations.

    Under the new section 144C the Secretary of State can serve a fixed penalty notice on a person whom he believes has committed an offence under section 144A. The amount of fixed penalty is £100 which is variable by statutory instrument.

    Section 144D introduces the new Schedule 2A. Under this Schedule the Secretary of State can make regulations which enable an authorised person to clamp vehicles upon reasonable suspicion that a section 144A offence has been committed and to enable the removal and disposal of such vehicles, including the time and manner in which such vehicles may be disposed of. Regulations may exempt a vehicle with a current disabled person's badge, or which meets other prescribed conditions, from being clamped. The Regulations may enable a person to obtain release of a clamped or an impounded vehicle if he or she pays any due charges and can show (a) that in driving the vehicle away he or she will not be committing an offence under section 143 of the RTA and (b) that the registered keeper is not guilty of an offence under the new section 144A. If the vehicle has already been disposed of, the regulations may provide for a sum to be paid to the vehicle's owner provided the claim is made within a prescribed period.

    Regulations may also make it a criminal offence to interfere with a clamp or associated notice, use a vehicle in breach of statutory requirements in connection with disabled persons or give any false declaration to secure release of a vehicle.

    Section 159A enables regulations to be made which require the Motor Insurers' Information Centre to provide information to prescribed persons. This information, together with records held by DVLA, will enable identification of registered keepers committing the offence under section 144A. The information can also be used for enforcement of other offences under Part 6 of the RTA (Third Party Liabilities) or offences made under regulations under section 160 of that Act, including those relating to immobilisation and release of vehicles provided for in the new Schedule 2A.

    Finally, section 22 makes consequential amendments to the RTOA in connection with the new offence in section 144A and the offences which may be created by regulations.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 15th Feb 11, 12:22 PM
    • 39,411 Posts
    • 23,390 Thanks
    Quentin
    I didn't even know you could buy 1 day policies.
    Originally posted by taxi73
    It is much cheaper to take out an annual policy with RAC rather than buy a one day policy.

    Do so online to start a week later (ie on a day when you can buy your tax disc).

    Buy your tax, then immediately cancel the policy under the cooling off period.

    You get refunded all but 1 day's premium (pro rata), and no other charge to pay.
  • charlie83
    Con!!!!
    This seems like a con to me , i have an older car which i keep to use just a month in the summer but under these new laws i will have to buy a years insurance , tax the car , use it for the month and THEN cancel the insurance and lose money then hand the tax back and AGAIN lose money , while searching on-line i have found out this scheme was spearheaded not by the government but get this everyone it was by the association of insurers and i wonder why ? and of course the government have gone along with this because who do you think the biggest tax payers in the country are ? you guessed it insurance company's
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 15th Feb 11, 1:30 PM
    • 1,413 Posts
    • 641 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    This seems like a con to me , i have an older car which i keep to use just a month in the summer but under these new laws i will have to buy a years insurance , tax the car , use it for the month and THEN cancel the insurance and lose money then hand the tax back and AGAIN lose money , while searching on-line i have found out this scheme was spearheaded not by the government but get this everyone it was by the association of insurers and i wonder why ? and of course the government have gone along with this because who do you think the biggest tax payers in the country are ? you guessed it insurance company's
    Originally posted by charlie83

    If it is not on the road and SORN when you are not using it, the SORN declaration covers the tax and insurance requirement.
    • Andy L
    • By Andy L 15th Feb 11, 1:31 PM
    • 9,854 Posts
    • 8,911 Thanks
    Andy L
    [QUOTE=charlie83;41219738]This seems like a con to me , i have an older car which i keep to use just a month in the summer but under these new laws i will have to buy a years insurance , tax the car , use it for the month and THEN cancel the insurance and lose money then hand the tax back and AGAIN lose money ,/QUOTE]

    What do you do differently at the moment then?
    • MSE Guy
    • By MSE Guy 15th Feb 11, 2:30 PM
    • 1,628 Posts
    • 1,255 Thanks
    MSE Guy
    My ignorance about the difference between a motor caravan and a caravan. Corrected.

    Just scaremongering! (Or did the article mean "motor caravans"?)

    Caravans do not have to be insured to take them on the road!
    Originally posted by Quentin
  • MrRedundant
    For me its a law that will penalise the minority and protect the majority. Whilst people will still drive uninsured and there will be some that lose out I suspect you will find these figures go down and that the day of the bangers in the driveway uninsured and unmoted will reduce thus increasing protection for most.

    I do accept some people will lose out but I would imagine those with fully roadworthy cars sitting that barely use them and hence insure them on temporary policies will be very very low.
  • Stephen Leak
    When does my premium go down by £30?
  • GM86
    I read GM86's post to mean he's currently keeping uninsured (but taxed) cars on the road while he fixes them up, which is naughty but currently unlikely to be found out. With the new legislation he'd be caught out.
    Originally posted by Andy L
    No sorry, I didn't explicitly state that I kept the car off the road on the driveway and currently I am perfectly within the law. I thought this would be clear as this is in the public domain.

    However if/when this comes into play it would make no sense to continue as a fast turn around would mean the extra paper work cost of either declaring the car off the road, negating the fact it came with tax, or insuring it/them would add to the cost.

    I.e. I buy a Audi A3, worth 1k i purchased for £500.
    I spend 100 on parts and would normally have it gone within 2 weeks.

    Current Law
    I spend £28 to get the car to my driveway (insurance), £15 on advertising. Call it £10 on petrol to get to me

    £653 total cost giving me 347 profit.

    New Law
    Same parts, has a full tank of petrol
    Insurance 14 days * 28 = 392

    Thus I am now £1007 spent, making it truly a hobby!

    I know there will be other options to this but as it stands it looks like its going to be a pain! Also as I am still young dont assume that going yearld option is best idea I have had quotes for 2.2k for the year
  • Arg
    For me its a law that will penalise the minority and protect the majority. Whilst people will still drive uninsured and there will be some that lose out I suspect you will find these figures go down and that the day of the bangers in the driveway uninsured and unmoted will reduce thus increasing protection for most.
    Originally posted by MrRedundant
    I think the policy of confiscating and destroying peoples cars for whatever traffic laws do a whole lot more to enourage people to drive cars that are not as roadworthy as they might be.
    Last edited by Arg; 15-02-2011 at 3:43 PM.
  • NickRedhill
    Surely annual insurance with limited mileage would equate to the daily use insurances and equally if trading you could again get limited annual cover for the level of cover you need. It's got to be cheaper or easier than setting up lots of ad-hoc cover. If daily cover is about £30 (a guess there) then 12 days a year would be as much as I pay for 15000 miles a year.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

711Posts Today

5,656Users online

Martin's Twitter