Why is driving uninsured such a big deal?

Why is driving uninsured such a big deal?

Author
Discussion

numtumfutunch

4,705 posts

137 months

Tuesday 26th May 2015
quotequote all
TheHound said:
Having read some of the chaps other posts, I don't think he is a troll in the traditional sense. I think he has some Serious mental health issues and just wants a sense of belonging.

OP you really need to go and see your doctor ASAP and chat through your problems. Starting controversial topics on here is not going to help you at all.

Get the help you need and then maybe you can get your life on track!
Im not sure to be honest
He comes across as a little too attention seeking

Much as I hate to join a pitch fork gang, Im nailing my colours to the half term mast




Toltec

7,159 posts

222 months

Tuesday 26th May 2015
quotequote all
He has a point in that seizing the car is a bit disproportionate, it should be possible to, for instance, stump up £100 on the spot to get temporary cover to get you home. Alternatively just insure the car online there and then.

You may still get a subsequent fine and points depending on the circumstances, how long the vehicle has been uninsured for etc. The fine should be several times what insurance for that period would have been.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

182 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
WinstonWolf said:
And then you hit someone who requires round the clock care for life as a result of your actions...
Or nod off behind the wheel of your Land Rover, sleepily coast down a roadside embankment onto the East Coast Main Line with Land Rover and Trailer straddled and stranded across the main line. Just in time to catch the Inter City 225 at speed and collide with it in one direction whilst for good measure, take out the fast freight in the other about half a mile later. Fatalities and carnage.

Great Heck! Hands up all those who think I made that up...

I did not, that happened on 28th February 2001 .... How much did that little lot cost ... bit more than loose change.

Funk

26,254 posts

208 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
I've worked out why the OP is having job difficulties; because cretin.

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Funk said:
I've worked out why the OP is having job difficulties; because cretin.
laugh

Just hope he never gets a driving licence - at least he's unlikely to find employment!

Didn't look at his location - just hope it isn't near me!

M6L11

1,222 posts

125 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Toltec said:
He has a point in that seizing the car is a bit disproportionate, it should be possible to, for instance, stump up £100 on the spot to get temporary cover to get you home. Alternatively just insure the car online there and then.

You may still get a subsequent fine and points depending on the circumstances, how long the vehicle has been uninsured for etc. The fine should be several times what insurance for that period would have been.
This is about as thoughtful as the OP's idea of a slapped wrist and a police escort home. How many scrotes, who don't care about insurance (and often VED, MOT etc) would adhere to this?

"Oh I say old chap, I had a jolly good slap on the wrist last night you know? Yes, some spiffing good constable chappy escorted me home and made me put the car on the drive. Terrible business, I shan't be venturing onto Her Majesty's highway until I'm all straightened out, that's for certain."

Um... no. Get escorted home (or pay £100 'fine') and back out the next day to chance it like every other time. It's what happens now, and impounding is the only sure-fire way to hit them in the pocket and stop the offence recurring easily (needing insurance docs to release the car).

How is this not common sense? Oh. Wait...

Flynn_

6 posts

106 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Sump said:
This is precisely why road tax needs to be hiked up to something like £2500 P/A. Weed out the poor people onto public transport and leave the roads to people who can actually afford to be there.

greygoose

8,225 posts

194 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Flynn_ said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Indeed. And remember that £700+ is only two quid a day...
700 quid? You ignorant prick, try more like 7 thousand you f u c k head.
Is there any need for all the abuse, perhaps you should calm down a bit?

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
greygoose said:
Flynn_ said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Indeed. And remember that £700+ is only two quid a day...
700 quid? You ignorant prick, try more like 7 thousand you f u c k head.
Is there any need for all the abuse, perhaps you should calm down a bit?
Thanks for quoting that - the numpty in question seems to have sobered up sufficiently and removed it.

Look, Flynn, unless you live in a warzone and have the sort of driving record that'll make any sane underwriter run screaming, the simplest way to reduce a seven grand premium is to drive something less startlingly inappropriate for your ink-still-wet licence.

LordGrover

33,532 posts

211 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
More likely posts removed and he's been banned. biggrin

Hol

8,360 posts

199 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
M6L11 said:
Toltec said:
He has a point in that seizing the car is a bit disproportionate, it should be possible to, for instance, stump up £100 on the spot to get temporary cover to get you home. Alternatively just insure the car online there and then.

You may still get a subsequent fine and points depending on the circumstances, how long the vehicle has been uninsured for etc. The fine should be several times what insurance for that period would have been.
This is about as thoughtful as the OP's idea of a slapped wrist and a police escort home. How many scrotes, who don't care about insurance (and often VED, MOT etc) would adhere to this?

"Oh I say old chap, I had a jolly good slap on the wrist last night you know? Yes, some spiffing good constable chappy escorted me home and made me put the car on the drive. Terrible business, I shan't be venturing onto Her Majesty's highway until I'm all straightened out, that's for certain."

Um... no. Get escorted home (or pay £100 'fine') and back out the next day to chance it like every other time. It's what happens now, and impounding is the only sure-fire way to hit them in the pocket and stop the offence recurring easily (needing insurance docs to release the car).

How is this not common sense? Oh. Wait...
Agreed. They wont take the sentiment, as you offered it.

They will simply pat themselves on the back, for their perceived cleverness in being able to go back and continue to undertake what they see as victimless crime.

However, when their IS a victim of their driving, they wont stop, they will hide behind a premise that it isn't their fault, because they were allowed back outside.

By NOT taking the car away, the authorities will be 'blamed' for actually giving him/it a mandate to reoffend. Which they technically did.






helidan

116 posts

109 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Toltec said:
He has a point in that seizing the car is a bit disproportionate, it should be possible to, for instance, stump up £100 on the spot to get temporary cover to get you home. Alternatively just insure the car online there and then.

You may still get a subsequent fine and points depending on the circumstances, how long the vehicle has been uninsured for etc. The fine should be several times what insurance for that period would have been.
I believe it is possible to arrange cover on the spot, the various police camera shows I've watched suggests it can be at the discretion of the officer dealing with you at the time.

Ari

19,328 posts

214 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Monkeylegend said:
Ari said:
Ignore the imbecilic answers. rolleyes

What you want to do is fold the rear seats flat.

This will lower and even out the centre of gravity, giving better handling and more traction.
That's twice tonight you have posted this wink
I'm taking both threads equally seriously. biggrin

0000

13,812 posts

190 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Toltec said:
He has a point in that seizing the car is a bit disproportionate, it should be possible to, for instance, stump up £100 on the spot to get temporary cover to get you home. Alternatively just insure the car online there and then.
I quite like the idea of having third party insurance in the cost of fuel - keeps pressure on fuel prices, is proportionate to miles driven, has a green element, low admin overheads and removes the whole category of uninsured drivers.

I'm sure there are downsides that would make it unattractive, I haven't heard them yet though.

AW111

9,455 posts

132 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
It is worth looking at how other countries handle this, as there are different approaches.

Here in Aus, medical (inc. 3rd party) insurance is compulsory, and is paid along with registration.
If a vehicle is registered, you are covered, and penalties for driving unregistered vehicles are harsh.

Anyone with a brain takes out at least 3rd party property insurance as well, of course, but it's not compulsory. Just don't run into power poles or Rollers.

Another difference is that insurance generally applies to the vehicle, not driver : most polices cover additional drivers as well.
You can get named driver only insurance, but not many do.
eg anyone who drives my car is fully covered, but if they are under 25 or on a probationary license, a much higher excess applies.
Van is 3rd party only : you bend it, you mend it (and pay the excess for 3rd party damage).

It is not a perfect system, but it seems to work fairly well. I think NZ has a similar system.

GravelBen

15,656 posts

229 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
MJK 24 said:
I've just spent a few months in NZ. You're correct in saying that there's no legal requirement for third party insurance cover. However, should you have an accident that is deemed to be your fault, and you don't have insurance, the third parties insurers will take you to court to recover their losses. This can lead to people being forced by the courts to sell assets - ie their home!
In theory it could happen, but that extreme is highly unlikely as the courts here are very soft. More common is a long-term payment scheme based on what the liable party can afford. A mate of mine hit someone's late model BMW while uninsured as a teenager and spent the next few years spending most of his disposable income paying off the damage. A hard lesson but a good one for a young bloke to learn.

I suspect that part of the reason insurance is so much cheaper here is that it isn't compulsory, so supply and demand actually has an effect. If the premiums are too high, its cheaper for people to take the risk or put money aside themselves in case of accident. Different risk balance with those options, but freedom to choose.

As has been said there is also govt administered accident/injury cover which is paid for partly out of fuel tax, car registration costs etc as well as from income and business taxes.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 27th May 09:47

Roger Irrelevant

2,899 posts

112 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Jesus Christ.

I've only read the OP and not the rest of the thread, and I presume that this point has been made several times already, but it's such a good one that it bears repeating:

The reason you are required to have car/vehicle insurance is that in the course of piloting a 1-tonne+ lump of metal about at relatively high speed you can cause an awful lot of costly damage to property and (more importantly), people. Of course you probably won't, and nobody means to cause such damage, but nobody is perfct and if you do slip up then it is fair and just that you make good the loss you have caused. Only a very few of us could afford, from our own means, to cover the costs of an accident victim's round the clock care for the rest of their life, or the rebuilding of a building we've smashed into, and that is why we need to be insured against that eventuality (and why we need everyone else to be insured in case it's us on the receiving end). If you're of modest means - as most of us are - then it could be that you'd struggle to even pay the costs that arise from a modest prang, so then it's even more important that you're insured for both your benefit and the person you've driven into. If you can't afford to insure against the damage you could do while on the road then don't drive.

It is because the potential loss you can cause to others is so great that the requirement for insurance is enforced so strictly. If the only punishment you got for driving without insurance was a slap on the wrist then why would anyone ever bother to get insured at all?

I suspect and hope that you are in fact trolling and understand all this anyway - it's worrying that someone who doesn't would be allowed to drive.

Edit: I've have now read the rest of the thread and the consensus is that the OP is indeed a troll. Good.

Edited by Roger Irrelevant on Wednesday 27th May 09:54

mat205125

17,790 posts

212 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Amazing OP nieve point of view.

The cost of supporting an individual that could suffer a life altering set of injuries in the event of an accident is astronomical.

The fact that our motor insurance protects our vehicles in the event of a cosmetic fender bender is a bonus to us ...... the real need for insurance is to protect and support the people in the vehicles, or those around us.

Limpet

6,293 posts

160 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
Being caught without insurance should work something like this:

Find out when the perp was last legal.
Work out what the perp has "saved" by not being insured from then until the time they were caught.
Triple it.
Give them 28 days to pay in full, or court action.

I had an uninsured driver drive into, and write off my old Cavalier SRi that was insured TPF&T. I basically lost a nice car as a result of it. If I'd been comp, I'd have lost no claims bonus and with excesses and premium hikes, would have still paid a four figure penalty in total, albeit over a longer period of time, so less of a "shock".

Why should these scum get away with it?

Edited by Limpet on Wednesday 27th May 09:53

mat205125

17,790 posts

212 months

Wednesday 27th May 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
Look, Flynn, unless you live in a warzone and have the sort of driving record that'll make any sane underwriter run screaming, the simplest way to reduce a seven grand premium is to drive something less startlingly inappropriate for your ink-still-wet licence.
This!! yes