Got pulled for no insurance - Help!!

[saaby93]

MP?
As long as they hold this stance you were definately uninsured and so the Court ought to convict - although i think someone else managed to escape.
It's not the first time someones been left uninsured by their insurer without their knowledge and its not helping with unisured drivers fro the rest of us
The FSA should be sorting it out but they could be about as useful as a not very useful thing

[LikesBikes]

They have been particularly unhelpful, they said to contact them when there is nowhere else to go with Hastings.

[saaby93]

LikesBikes said:

They have been particularly unhelpful, they said to contact them when there is nowhere else to go with Hastings.

They can only begin once youre in that position and it looks like you are now

[LikesBikes]

Probably do have nowhere else to go with Hastings other than bat letters back and forth. Thought it interesting that he said the certificate is not issued subject to proof of NCD. But just because they cancelled against the rules does not indemnify me from driving without cover, even if I had time to pursue this before the court appearance. Which I don't.

[saaby93]

Its getting to the position where you need to take out separate cover in case your insurer decides to pull the plug from under you for no apparant reason.
They seem to have this idea that if there is a mistake theyre not allowed to backdate to the date of the mistake, whereas it's not about backdating you're just trying to pay for the period you thought you were covered.
That's the line you need to take

[Tallbut Buxomly]

LikesBikes said:

Probably do have nowhere else to go with Hastings other than bat letters back and forth. Thought it interesting that he said the certificate is not issued subject to proof of NCD. But just because they cancelled against the rules does not indemnify me from driving without cover, even if I had time to pursue this before the court appearance. Which I don't.

The only difference in outcome whether you plead guilty or not is that if you plead not guilty they can find you not guilty.
9i would therefore suggest you take all your correspondence with you to court and by that i mean everything and all evidence you can find that supports the theory that hastings were at fault and you could not have known your policy was cancelled.

Also take any info ref the insurance ombudsman or whichever it is with you to court in terms of case notes, numbers and people you have called and when. Tell the magistrates that you are still in dispute with your insurer about whether you were insured as you believed you were as they had not advised you otherwise.

Oh when they ask you to state your case make a point of pointing out that you have various bits of correspondence between yourself and hastings which support your argument that they failed in their duties to insure you.

[LikesBikes]

I was thinking along those lines however I'm worried that if I plead not guilty am I in danger of having the book thrown at me because they think I'm taking the piss.

I'd like to think that my years of continuous cover on bikes and cars would count for something in demonstrating I am not the type to intentionally do this but I'm not so confident. 

I can only hope that if found guilty an absolute discharge might be considered as the increased premiums for the rest of my life due to a cancelled policy, the cost of releasing my car and 6 months of stress and worry is punishment enough. 

[GC8]

You plainly arent taking the piss. Remember too that the summary trial isnt where it has to end.

[LikesBikes]

Going to show my ignorance here, the only time I've ever been in court was when I did jury service. 

Am I right in assuming that the magistrates won't necessarily make their mind up on the day of the first appearance. Is that what you mean by summary hearing? 

If they do decide I'm guilty and taking the piss and give me the points plus fine plus costs and I decide to appeal, do I then have to go before a jury and risk a far worse outcome?

Just occurred to me I have no idea how all this works

[LikesBikes]

And why do I keep getting that accented 'A' at the end of nearly every paragraph?

[Tallbut Buxomly]

If you have been summonsed to appear in court for Ni then you will be heard and convicted same day it takes around 20mins to an hr.

You will be asked to confirm who you are to a panel of iirc three magistrates. You will be asked to plead either guilty or not. If not you will be asked to state your case.

[saaby93]

In summary
You took out insurance with new insurer
You got proof of no claims from previous insurer and sent it off
Insurer send you note saying they havent received proof of no claims and are about to cancel policy but you dont receive letter
They send you second letter saying insurance cancelled, which you dont receive

Police stop you for no insurance

You check bank account and insurance premium has been credited
You phone up insurer and offer to resend the premium they sent back and get another copy of no claims

They say tough we cant backdate
It's this last sentence which should have read 'pleased to do business'

Can someone explain to insurers that this isnt backdating it's only paying for what you thought you had in the first place, (especially when the correct premium was already paid)

Backdating is where you phone up and say can I take out some insurance from last week

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 18th September 13:57

[Noger]

saaby93 said:

Can someone explain to insurers that this isnt backdating it's only paying for what you thought you had in the first place, (especially when the correct premium was already paid)

Backdating is where you phone up and say can I take out some insurance from last week

That is still backdating cover.

Please, stop this nonsense with making up things you don't know about. Someone is about to go to court, and YOU have no skin in the game.

[saaby93]

Noger said:

Please, stop this nonsense with making up things you don't know about. Someone is about to go to court, and YOU have no skin in the game.

If his insurers will reinstate his insurance ( not back date it) he's in the clear


I posted about it on page 1

saaby93 said:

Same happened here
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

This cancelling insurance isn't an isolated case and something needs to be done about it - it's in no-ones interest to have uninsured drivers on the road.
This isnt a rant against insurers BTW
It's something that's gone wrong in the procedures
Meanwhile if he can speak nicely to them they might be able to reinstate rather than backdate but dont count chickens

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 18th September 17:40

[Noger]

Can I be blunt ? Apologies in advance.

Either get yourself some legal advice, or forget internet-people trying to wind up some kind of anti-insurer protest on the back of YOUR problems.

You are in danger of losing sight of the main point (you being found guilty) in a sea of self-righteous indignation against Hastings. You may well be right, they may be pretty shoddy, but what do you want to happen ? Get off the charges or show them up as fools ?

All this stuff about post times and SMS is a side issue, and unless you focus on the important issue you are in danger of presenting an excellent set of facts about how they are a bit rubbish at admin, but none on how you are not guilty.

The £15 is just so that if you DO go to the FOS (who can't make you not guilty) then they can say "We gave him some money, we treated his complaint seriously. Your complaint is probably reportable, so adding on some compensation to the report make them look good. And they do need to look good these days. So ignore that, it isn't an indication that they think they are wrong.

If you get some proper legal advice, they will be able to pick out the relevant parts of this to look at, I do think that is your best course. Nobody else here gets points and a fine from this, so please don't get egged on by others.

[Noger]

saaby93 said:

Noger said:

Please, stop this nonsense with making up things you don't know about. Someone is about to go to court, and YOU have no skin in the game.

If his insurers will reinstate his insurance ( not back date it) he's in the clear


I posted about it on page 1

saaby93 said:

Same happened here
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

This isn't an isolated case and something needs to be done about it - it's in no-ones interest to have uninsured drivers on the road
What else can he do?

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 18th September 17:26

Yes, and I told you then what the options are.

1) Admin error = letter of indemnity to show the mags
2) Not an admin error = you were not covered
3) Manage to get someone to frig the system to backdate....unlikely but worth a go

As the OP still had the cert, then his insurers would still be liable for any TP claims. So you can't play the "uninsured drivers are bad" card.

Yes, the fact that "somehow" two letters didn't reach their destination, and the OP thought they had insurance but they didn't is a poor state of affairs. But pleading not guilty and having a moan in court won't change a thing and the OP may be worse off.

Get the best possible outcome in court, and then lets do the moaning, eh ?

[saaby93]

Noger said:

As the OP still had the cert, then his insurers would still be liable for any TP claims.

Thanks Noger
Is that the key that unlocks this one?

[Noger]

Sadly not.

I don't think the OP was insured. The question is, are the actions (or inactions) of Hastings enough to be able to please not guilty, or are they mitigating circumstances to a guilty ?

Pleading guilty does mean having to suck up their behaviour, which isn't nice.

Don't have the answer.

[R1 Loon]

saaby93 said:

Noger said:

As the OP still had the cert, then his insurers would still be liable for any TP claims.

Thanks Noger
Is that the key that unlocks this one?

Not in anyway that cover is provided by the insurer under the RTA obligations and is not a way to claim to have insurance. That loophole was closed a long time ago by abuse form people buying a policy on monthly instalments, getting the certificate and then stopping paying.

[saaby93]

R1 Loon said:

Not in anyway that cover is provided by the insurer under the RTA obligations and is not a way to claim to have insurance. That loophole was closed a long time ago by abuse form people buying a policy on monthly instalments, getting the certificate and then stopping paying.

I think we know why we've ended up in this situation, trouble is it's gone too far and leading people who have paid the preimum ( or tried) ending up being uninsured and no way of applying for reinstatement.
Who created the no backdating rule? Is it government or insurance?

In this thread they increased the premiums until it was sorted out
they could have taken away the insurance there too
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...