Got pulled for no insurance - Help!!

[Farmerpalmer]

Y282 said:

good result mate, nice to hear common sense winning out!

+1 well done

[saaby93]

Good news but as I said some months back

saaby93 said:

I think thats the problem. In worrying too much about trying to remove people who are abusing the system, it's catching out normal people who believe they've correctly taken out their insurance.
Is it the old argument about how many guilty people do we want to go free to ensure that no-one who's innocent is locked up?

Any ideas to help out when it happens?

It's a pity insurers couldnt have been given some direction that although theyre not allowed to backdate insurance, they are allowed to rectify mistakes from the data it occurred.
Meanwhile you're not the only one to have suffered and you wont be the last

[eskidavies]

are they going to reimbirse towing and storage charge,the least of your worries i know but it would be a nice jester for the stress you had the last year .well done anyway good show

[GC8]

LikesBikes said:

To update you all, having had a previous special reasons hearing cancelled I finally got my day in court on Friday, a fortnight short of a year from the time of being stopped by the police. 

With the help of an outstanding solicitor and reams of paperwork/letters along with hearsay evidence from the internet (which the prosecutor allowed in unchallenged) the court were satisfied that I had no knowledge of the cancellation and concluded that I had been unfairly misled by Hastings Direct. 

The outcome of the whole event was that although technically convicted by having previously pleaded guilty to the "absolute offence" of driving without insurance I have been given an absolute discharge with no fine and no endorsement or even mention of the conviction on my license. Also, given the nature of the circumstances, the prosecutor declined to apply for any court costs to be paid by me. The best result I could get.  

Sincere thanks to all who helped, advised and supported me throughout this thread, in particular Saaby amongst others who I should really go through the thread and find the names of, you know who you are. Without your input I would have rolled over and died in the face of it all long ago. 

And to the few who doubted and suggested I was lying? Hmm, well....


Sincere thanks all, genuinely appreciate everything. 

Darren. 

Edited by LikesBikes on Sunday 3rd April 10:56

Bloody good for you. Hopefully the encouraging posts (mine included) steeled your will - with the resulting satisfactory outcome.

[saaby93]

My favourite one was this one where they gave him an extra £15

LikesBikes said:

saaby93 said:

Do you think youre not guilty because as yet they still havent cancelled your insurance?

Thats exactly what I think

Returned the FPN the other day to request the case be heard in court, so just waiting for a date now.

Incidentally, today they told me the cheque for £15 was to cover my costs in telephone calls. I find it strange they felt the need to reimburse these costs to someone they no longer consider to be a customer. Especially when they regard that would be 'ex-customer' as bleating on about a situation of his own making?

[LikesBikes]

Apologies for not getting back sooner, been mental.
Obviously renewal time is here and it's proving tough. The insurance is refusing to accept the difference between an absolute discharge and 6 points/£200. But dealing with that.
My licence was handed back to me in court and shows no endorsement. I'm wondering does this count as a conviction (although technically guilty)? As is just my luck my solicitor is away and his colleague deals in other matters so can't clear this up.
The policy went up £140 just for the 'have you ever had insurance cancelled?' bit!!
Bloody hell, it's never ending

[saaby93]

LikesBikes said:

Apologies for not getting back sooner, been mental.
Obviously renewal time is here and it's proving tough. The insurance is refusing to accept the difference between an absolute discharge and 6 points/£200. But dealing with that.

There was a post on that back at the beginning
ETA
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
page 8 second post down
It's from mel who posted a few posts up this page

Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 13th April 17:51

[Haytch]

Great result

[LikesBikes]

Sorted. Obviously the likes of confused.com was difficult to explain online, however my local A-plan were outstanding and beat the best conviction free online quote. 

The bloke in there said the 'conviction' shouldn't be a problem and confirmed this with the underwriter, same for the cancellation based on the fact that the court ruled that I had been misled. Got all that confirmed in writing and a copy in their records too. 

Also paid in cash to make an automated cancellation impossible

[rewc]

I know that the Police are very busy but with all this interaction they are taking to put markers against cars wouldn't a simple form to the RK saying that according to records there is no insurance on the vehicle bethe beat initial action. If the intention is to prevent uninsured vehicles being on the roads rather than prosecuting those they catch it seems this is a fairly cheap option.
I presume that under the new continual insurance regulations that the OP would have got a fine in the post in any event so sending a warnng letter wouldn't have caused much of an effort.

[LikesBikes]

Its a nice idea but I guess they can't let an driver continue without insurance once identified. Imagine the stink if an uninsured driver hit someone and it turned out the police were aware in advance?

[saaby93]

LikesBikes said:

Its a nice idea but I guess they can't let an driver continue without insurance once identified. Imagine the stink if an uninsured driver hit someone and it turned out the police were aware in advance?

Eeven if they send a spotted driver a fine they're letting then get away with it
Trouble is as we know, the driver could be insured. The ANPR machine only looks at the vehicle.
Continuous insurance enforcement is only a database reconcilliation. If it gets off the ground the first thing they'll do is send a letter to see if you want to insure or SORN the vehicle. It's only if you dont do either or fail to receive the letter that it goes to the next stage of issuing a FPN

ETA say Yes to AV. If you dont get your first choice you might get your second

Edited by saaby93 on Monday 18th April 15:21

[rewc]

LikesBikes said:

Its a nice idea but I guess they can't let an driver continue without insurance once identified. Imagine the stink if an uninsured driver hit someone and it turned out the police were aware in advance?

They are aware in advance as they are putting a marker against the car.

[F i F]

saaby93 said:

even if they send a spotted driver a fine they're letting then get away with it
Trouble is as we know, the driver could be insured. The ANPR machine only looks at the vehicle.
Continuous insurance enforcement is only a database reconcilliation. If it gets off the ground the first thing they'll do is send a letter to see if you want to insure or SORN the vehicle. It's only if you dont do either or fail to receive the letter that it goes to the next stage of issuing a FPN

Equally a vehicle could show on the database as insured, but not for the driver currently at the wheel.

Remember the THIS rule, "Is THIS driver insured to drive THIS vehicle at THIS time for THIS purpose."