No Continuous Insurance - Court

[bga]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

NinjaPower said:

I honestly haven't heard of this stupid rule until now!

That's amazing. It was very well publicised for months before and after it came into effect.

It had passed me by too, albeit I am aware of SORN.

[Aidancky]

Another question people - on the form it says "If you are found guilty the agency will apply for costs of at least £100"

If I plead guilty, what affects this cost? Who is "the Agency"?

[vonhosen]

If you plead guilty they can still apply for costs having prepared it for a court hearing, if you'd accepted the penalty notice they couldn't.
The DVLA (Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency)

It's they who regularly compare their vehicle records against the insurance database to highlight which vehicles are not currently shown as insured & aren't shown as SORN'd on their records.

[TooMany2cvs]

bga said:

It had passed me by too, albeit I am aware of SORN.

Since SORN has been in place for 18 years, rather than the mere 5 for continuous insurance...

[fatjon]

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

[Osinjak]

vonhosen said:

Did you have any contact with the VSS (Victim Support Services) at court etc?
You don't receive cash as a victim of crime from the victim surcharge, the money goes to fund support services for victims of crime.

I got a VSS text message after a bloke was arrested for careless driving for chasing me around town after I had the temerity to honk at him after he cut me up on a mini-roundabout, does that count?!

[C70R]

evilmunkey said:

Im no legal eagle but just from a common sense point of view i dont see how it could be an offence. its taxed but as you say its on private property being repaired and when it has been on the road its been insured. I cant see an offence there. sounds crazy to be honest and ive never heard anything about laws pertaining to continual insurance. a lot of solicitors have free drop in sessions so you should be able to get some expert advice prior to ticking any boxes. does sound bloody mad . thing is that link refers to a vehicle being sorned and kept off road. the o.p said his was taxed so cant see the issue.

This is an unhelpful, verging on dangerous, post that is masquerading as "advice".

[KevinCamaroSS]

fatjon said:

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

Absolute rubbish.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

fatjon said:

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

Small print = normal sized print that I was too fking lazy to read and now want to blame someone else for my tardiness.

[Yex 450]

Aidancky said:

I'm usually at your side of this. I get what you mean though, I live in Bradford currently and it's probably one of the worst places for people driving with no insurance/MOT/tax etc.

I think you may have been caught out by the issue you mention above. If it is a known problem in your area perhaps the DVLA is more focused and your car may have been caught as part of a trawl around the area, rather unfortunate in my opinion.

[fatjon]

KevinCamaroSS said:

fatjon said:

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

Absolute rubbish.

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri...

[Mill Wheel]

While ignorance of the law is no excuse, the OP clearly demonstrated his ignorance to the DVLA...

Aidancky said:

I responded with the valid reason (Repairing vehicle), as well as sending them evidence of 3 dates where i'd paid for singular days insurance when I needed it (for MOT and repairs)

Heard nothing back, and now have a Court Summons for not paying the fine...

It appears that in it's usual manner the DVLA has failed to respond reasonably, which would have given him time to pay the FPN before court!

[TheBear]

fatjon said:

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri...

My Insurance company sent me a letter telling me my renewal was due in just over 3 weeks. It clearly stated on the normal sized letter that it would auto renew unless I didn't like the quote and how to cancel if I didn't.

My wife's also did with a different company.

We both changes companies for better quotes. It was easy.

Not quite sure what is sneaky about that?

[vonhosen]

Mill Wheel said:

While ignorance of the law is no excuse, the OP clearly demonstrated his ignorance to the DVLA...

Aidancky said:

I responded with the valid reason (Repairing vehicle), as well as sending them evidence of 3 dates where i'd paid for singular days insurance when I needed it (for MOT and repairs)

Heard nothing back, and now have a Court Summons for not paying the fine...

It appears that in it's usual manner the DVLA has failed to respond reasonably, which would have given him time to pay the FPN before court!

It's not a valid reason though even if he contends it is. He has been informed by them what he failed to comply with, to them it will sound like he contests it,, but they see no basis on which to cancel the action from what he says. In such circumstances contested cases go to the courts, they don't result in a back & forth discussion over it with them giving a further explanation & him going 'yeah but' like happens here.

[TooMany2cvs]

fatjon said:

KevinCamaroSS said:

fatjon said:

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

Absolute rubbish.

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri...

Correct, that's a motor insurance directive.

But it's nothing whatsoever to do with CIE, and everything to do with enabling people across the EU to claim more easily.

http://ec.europa.eu/finance/insurance/consumer/mot...
http://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/content/right-road

CIE is entirely UK - the EU doesn't even oblige every country to have a VED equivalent, let alone the detail of how that relates to insurance, or on whether it's auto-renewable or not.

[Joeguard1990]

Aidancky said:

Hi Guys.

Bought a car earlier in the year and kept it off-road on my driveway for repairs, for a few months. Got a letter a while later informing me of a £100 fine for not having continual insurance. I responded with the valid reason (Repairing vehicle), as well as sending them evidence of 3 dates where i'd paid for singular days insurance when I needed it (for MOT and repairs)

Heard nothing back, and now have a Court Summons for not paying the fine... I've never had anything like this before, and now am unsure what kind of costs i'm going to incur, simply for having a car taxed but not insured, off the road.

I have the option to Plead Guilty by post or in court, or Not Guilty at court.

I am guilty of not having continual insurance; am I going to incur court costs for pleading guilty by post? How does it work?
I feel this is harsh and unfair, and comes at a time I really can't afford this sort of fine.

I live in a place where I see cars and bikes with no plates on (and clearly no insurance), yet i'm getting Court Summons for fixing my car off the road?

I dont expect any pity, just wondering what kind of costs its going to have now - It mentions £100 fine on the letter, is this my original fine, or is this in addition to the fine I already had (court costs)?

Thanks.

I haven't read through any of the replies but the short answer is you should have declared the Car SORN. It's no good leaving it on your drive without insurance as if you don't declare it SORN you'll receive a fine which you have already experienced. Always remember your car either needs Insurance or if not SORN and off the road or you risk a fine.

[KevinCamaroSS]

TooMany2cvs said:

fatjon said:

KevinCamaroSS said:

fatjon said:

It is a scam which was lobbied for by the EU and the insurance companies. It is mainly intended to allow them to helpfully autorenew your policy (and charge your card) at double last years rate without you noticing it in the small print.

Absolute rubbish.

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri...

Correct, that's a motor insurance directive.

But it's nothing whatsoever to do with CIE, and everything to do with enabling people across the EU to claim more easily.

http://ec.europa.eu/finance/insurance/consumer/mot...
http://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/content/right-road

CIE is entirely UK - the EU doesn't even oblige every country to have a VED equivalent, let alone the detail of how that relates to insurance, or on whether it's auto-renewable or not.

Thanks TooMany. As I indicated earlier it is not a scam, it has a sensible purpose.

[Pip1968]

It may have a sensible purpose but it has not been thought through properly and let's face it will not catch those it is supposed to only the more law abiding citizen who actually has the car registered at his home address and not some ficticious one.

We pay tax for a whole month regardless of whether the car is on the road for a day OR a month. How much are gas guzzlers now +£600 for twelve months?? So now even if you take it off insurance on the first day of the month you will pay perhaps £50 and then if you put it back on the road on the last day of the month you will pay another say £50. Where is the sense in that??

If they want to implement this they should enable road tax to be paid and refunded pro rata. End of.

Meanwhile the bloke who dumped his old banger in my road continued to drive his car with black rubber/tar altering his number plate to some other VRN. I bet he is not in court or paying £100 or any bullsh#t 'victim surcharge'. We are all 'victims'.

Pip

[BertBert]

No amount of EU directive will make up for the daftness of how you have extrapolated events.
How come auto renew came about before CIE?
How is it you can't read whether you have auto-renew or not?
How is it that you don't bother to check how much your insurance is charging you?
How come you think you are obliged to renew at the auto-renew price?

fatjon said:

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri...

[TwigtheWonderkid]

fatjon said:

Wind your neck in and learn something.
This was a massive money spinner lobbied for at European level by the MIB. This then allowed the insurance companies to implement a policy, based on this legislation, of helping us to not forget to renew by doing it for us unless we remembered to tell them not to, at whatever price they choose.

Dear God, please tell me this is a joke post and you don't actually believe this drivel?