Driving License records to go online
Discussion
It's great news that most people's insurance premiums will go down. Apparently they rate against the odds of people lying on their application.
Have you points? nope. ok we'll charge you extra for possibly lying.
Have you points? yep. ok we'll charge you extra for having points.
I must have been a fool to be honest those years I had a speeding ticket -- where can I claim my refund for the charge I've been paying since that expired just in case i was lying? Seriously they only had to ask.
Do tesco add for a loaf of bread and some razor blades just in case I was shoplifting? is there any other supposedly legitimate business getting away with what appears to be institutional fraud?
SM
Have you points? nope. ok we'll charge you extra for possibly lying.
Have you points? yep. ok we'll charge you extra for having points.
I must have been a fool to be honest those years I had a speeding ticket -- where can I claim my refund for the charge I've been paying since that expired just in case i was lying? Seriously they only had to ask.
Do tesco add for a loaf of bread and some razor blades just in case I was shoplifting? is there any other supposedly legitimate business getting away with what appears to be institutional fraud?
SM
XCP said:
Surely then the computer in the sky would confirm that you were banned? and I agree, you don't need to hold a licence to insure or own a car.
You can throw your money away on insurance if you like but you'll struggle to claim successfully. Check one of the key warranties which states "The proposer holds a valid driving licence for the type of vehicle to be insured" LoonR1 said:
You can throw your money away on insurance if you like but you'll struggle to claim successfully. Check one of the key warranties which states "The proposer holds a valid driving licence for the type of vehicle to be insured"
Even for Fire & Theft cover only?agtlaw said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Suppose someone had points more than 5 years ago. Will they still show up?
Depends where you mean but generally yes. I was surprised to see what the CPS can get hold of if suitably motivated - non-endorseable offences from 15 years ago, etc. speedking31 said:
LoonR1 said:
You can throw your money away on insurance if you like but you'll struggle to claim successfully. Check one of the key warranties which states "The proposer holds a valid driving licence for the type of vehicle to be insured"
Even for Fire & Theft cover only?Car insurance as the majority of the country knows it includes road risks and requires a valid and current licence for the type of vehicle being covered.
agtlaw said:
Different issue. davepoth is the expert here on Rehab of Offenders Act. Generally, even if asked you don't need to disclose spent offences to an insurer.
That is true, 3 years for most less serious driving offences. However the endorsements stay on the licence for 5 years, so the spent offence is still visible...eldar said:
That is true, 3 years for most less serious driving offences. However the endorsements stay on the licence for 5 years, so the spent offence is still visible...
Insurance companies are not penalising you for committing an offence directly. they are charging more due to the evidential and experiential increase in risk from some or all offences. Not long ago a single SP30 on a licence meant £0 increase in premium.If people choose not to declare then they run the risk of a voi policy come claim time.
LoonR1 said:
Insurance companies are not penalising you for committing an offence directly. they are charging more due to the evidential and experiential increase in risk from some or all offences. Not long ago a single SP30 on a licence meant £0 increase in premium.
If people choose not to declare then they run the risk of a voi policy come claim time.
Even if spent?If people choose not to declare then they run the risk of a voi policy come claim time.
LoonR1 said:
You can throw your money away on insurance if you like but you'll struggle to claim successfully. Check one of the key warranties which states "The proposer holds a valid driving licence for the type of vehicle to be insured"
I found an exception to this Sir Loon, as always there always be some tosser or other to contradict you !When my licence was revoked, they allowed me to keep the car insured, as it originally was, so my wife could continue to use the car (she was a named driver).
The insurance had about 9 months to run, my revokation only lasted 7 weeks, but they did say they'd be able to sort something out at renewal if required.
Dr Jekyll said:
LoonR1 said:
Insurance companies are not penalising you for committing an offence directly. they are charging more due to the evidential and experiential increase in risk from some or all offences. Not long ago a single SP30 on a licence meant £0 increase in premium.
If people choose not to declare then they run the risk of a voi policy come claim time.
Even if spent?If people choose not to declare then they run the risk of a voi policy come claim time.
Hypothetically speaking (and simplistically) I'm an insurer and I know that there is a 90% chance that someone with 3 SP30s gathered over a 5 year period is likely to make a claim. I also know that someone with a single SP30 that's 4 years old is only a 5% chance whereas someone with a clean licence is a10% chance.
I will prove accordingly and firstly try to attract those with a single 4 year old SP30 first, second will be a clean licence holder and I will price the guy with three SP30s highly in the hope that he buys elsewhere.
The first one who is getting the best deal has a spent conviction but it is working to his advantage. The latter has potentially two spent and one live conviction which is working against him and the middle one has no convictions which is actually working against him.
It cuts both ways despite the Urban Myth to the contrary. If stat support something no matter how counter intuitive then an insurer will price accordingly.
Nigel Worc's said:
I found an exception to this Sir Loon, as always there always be some tosser or other to contradict you !
When my licence was revoked, they allowed me to keep the car insured, as it originally was, so my wife could continue to use the car (she was a named driver).
The insurance had about 9 months to run, my revokation only lasted 7 weeks, but they did say they'd be able to sort something out at renewal if required.
That's fine. You had a valid licence and they quite possibly made an exception after some discussion. It's not a free pass to get insurance without a licence. If you could why not start insuring a POS car at 12 so as to build up 5 years NCD at 17. When my licence was revoked, they allowed me to keep the car insured, as it originally was, so my wife could continue to use the car (she was a named driver).
The insurance had about 9 months to run, my revokation only lasted 7 weeks, but they did say they'd be able to sort something out at renewal if required.
VinceFox said:
Does this mean others can see your details?
Yes because like all online databases everyone can see everyone else's details. The DPA is not applicable to anything run by the Government. Go to the government gateway website and you'll be able to review all the tax returns etc that have been submitted ever. Go to askmid and you'll see everyone's car insurance details. 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff