AskMid

[jayfrancis]

Just a quick question for all you chaps in the know. I apologise if it's been asked a million times before but here goes.

OH picked up her new car from the dealer this morning. She informed her insurer of the change and they were kind enough to overlap both cars for today only.

The question is the car appears as uninsured on AskMid so how long does it take for the database to be updated and is carrying her new insurance certificate with her enough to keep her legal if she gets a tug?

Thanks in advance.

[SS2.]

Could be a few days before the database is updated.

[ZOLLAR]

Up to 7 days.

http://www.mib.org.uk/Motor+Insurance+Database/en/...

[LoonR1]

jayfrancis said:

Just a quick question for all you chaps in the know. I apologise if it's been asked a million times before but here goes.

OH picked up her new car from the dealer this morning. She informed her insurer of the change and they were kind enough to overlap both cars for today only.

The question is the car appears as uninsured on AskMid so how long does it take for the database to be updated and is carrying her new insurance certificate with her enough to keep her legal if she gets a tug?

Thanks in advance.

That's the only legal proof that you're insured. And seriously? Do people really worry about stuff like this?

[ben5732]

Takes a bit to appear on MID and pnc systems. Take your insurance paperwork and new Part of the V5 with you wherever you go for the next few days as police won't be able to confirm if you're insured or not until the system is updated. If you get pulled explain the situation and so long as that checks out they'll give you a producer.

[LoonR1]

ben5732 said:

Takes a bit to appear on MID and pnc systems. Take your insurance paperwork and new Part of the V5 with you wherever you go for the next few days as police won't be able to confirm if you're insured or not until the system is updated. If you get pulled explain the situation and so long as that checks out they'll give you a producer.

A producer? To produce what? The stuff you've just produced at the roadside?

Paranoia and duff advice runs wild in SP&L

[Jasandjules]

ben5732 said:

Takes a bit to appear on MID and pnc systems. Take your insurance paperwork and new Part of the V5 with you wherever you go for the next few days as police won't be able to confirm if you're insured or not until the system is updated. If you get pulled explain the situation and so long as that checks out they'll give you a producer.

If you show them the insurance certificate and the V5 then you've pretty much proved you own and are insured to drive it. So that is problem solved is it not?

[LoonR1]

Jasandjules said:

If you show them the insurance certificate and the V5 then you've pretty much proved you own and are insured to drive it. So that is problem solved is it not?

Yes. 100%. Completely. Absolutely. Definitively.

[EskimoArapaho]

LoonR1 said:

Jasandjules said:

If you show them the insurance certificate and the V5 then you've pretty much proved you own and are insured to drive it. So that is problem solved is it not?

Yes. 100%. Completely. Absolutely. Definitively.

Except the police have shown more than once that "computer says no" matters more.

The reason they gave was that a certificate can be printed off on the day a policy is taken out and the policy holder can call and cancel the insurance a couple of days later. So the car would show as uninsured on ASKMID, actually be uninsured, and all despite chummy waving a certificate at the policeman who's pulled him over.

So the police do not take the certificate at face value.

[Cat]

LoonR1 said:

Jasandjules said:

If you show them the insurance certificate and the V5 then you've pretty much proved you own and are insured to drive it. So that is problem solved is it not?

Yes. 100%. Completely. Absolutely. Definitively.

Not really. The V5 shows that at some point in time the person named on it was the registered keeper (not the owner) - it doesn't prove who the the current RK or owner is. Likewise all an insurance certificate shows is that there was a policy in force at the time it was issued - it is no guarantee of the current insurance status.

Cat

[ben5732]

It's not guarantee, however someone with a filled in New keeper supplement dated and a fresh insurance document is going to have a lot more chance of being believed that someone who's owned the car for months on end and suddenly has flagged up no insurance with a document from months back.

[Osinjak]

Jasandjules said:

ben5732 said:

Takes a bit to appear on MID and pnc systems. Take your insurance paperwork and new Part of the V5 with you wherever you go for the next few days as police won't be able to confirm if you're insured or not until the system is updated. If you get pulled explain the situation and so long as that checks out they'll give you a producer.

If you show them the insurance certificate and the V5 then you've pretty much proved you own and are insured to drive it. So that is problem solved is it not?

They also ring the insurance company to check as well. I saw them do it on Police Transformers (or something) so it must be true.

[Cliftonite]

Osinjak said:

They also ring the insurance company to check as well. I saw them do it on Police Transformers (or something) so it must be true.

Unless they can contact the insurance company, the police MUST accept a valid Certificate as proof of insurance. Even if motor is not on AskMid. It's the Law, innit?

[Cat]

ben5732 said:

It's not guarantee, however someone with a filled in New keeper supplement dated and a fresh insurance document is going to have a lot more chance of being believed that someone who's owned the car for months on end and suddenly has flagged up no insurance with a document from months back.

Absolutely. The advice to carry the insurance certificate and new keeper supplement is spot on and will go along way to prevent any issues. I was merely pointing out that production of an insurance certificate is not particularly good proof of insurance being in force.

Cat

[LoonR1]

Cat said:

Not really. The V5 shows that at some point in time the person named on it was the registered keeper (not the owner) - it doesn't prove who the the current RK or owner is. Likewise all an insurance certificate shows is that there was a policy in force at the time it was issued - it is no guarantee of the current insurance status.

Cat

Except having a paper certificate is the only point at which the law recognises you're insured. MID and any other evidence is not proof in the strictest sense, which is what seems to matter on SP&L.

The V5 and the other stuff matters not one jot. Nobody cares who owns, or taxes or lay fines on a vehicle. If you're driving it, the police want to know that you're insured to do that and an insurance certificate proves that. Hiding behind the "it was in force when issued" comment is flawed as the insurer remains de facto insurer under the RTA anyway, until the certificate is returned if the policy is cancelled, irrespective of by whom.

[Osinjak]

Cliftonite said:

Unless they can contact the insurance company, the police MUST accept a valid Certificate as proof of insurance. Even if motor is not on AskMid. It's the Law, innit?

Ah but how do they know it's real? It's a proper conundrum I tells ya.

[pingu393]

I was pulled in the exact circumstances the OP is concerned about. Worse still, it was on a Saturday afternoon and the brokers were shut, so plod couldn't contact them.

I got off with being asked to produce printed insurance documents dated AFTER the date I was stopped showing that I was insured WHEN I was stopped. My broker knew exactly what was required and the documents were on my doormat by Tuesday lunchtime.

AFAIK, if plod suspected that I wasn't insured (my attitude must have convinced them I was a fine, upstanding citizen ), they could have seized the vehicle. As I was miles from home with goods on board, this would have been mega-problems.

[Red Devil]

EskimoArapaho said:

Except the police have shown more than once that "computer says no" matters more.

The reason they gave was that a certificate can be printed off on the day a policy is taken out and the policy holder can call and cancel the insurance a couple of days later. So the car would show as uninsured on ASKMID, actually be uninsured, and all despite chummy waving a certificate at the policeman who's pulled him over.

So the police do not take the certificate at face value.

Another point to consider. AFAIK RTA Section 147(1)- http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/sectio... - has not been repealed.
Many people are unaware that, despite what askMid may say, the policy is not effected until you have received a valid certificate.
So having it with you early doors would be a good start.

If BiB have any doubts they can call the insurer so make sure you have the relevant contact number.
Of course this may not be of much use at 2am on the M(insert favourite number).

[Cat]

LoonR1 said:

Except having a paper certificate is the only point at which the law recognises you're insured. MID and any other evidence is not proof in the strictest sense, which is what seems to matter on SP&L.

Notwithstanding that since 2010 an electronic copy of a certificate has been sufficient, a certificate of insurance doesn't prove someone is insured if the policy to which it relates has been cancelled.

LoonR1 said:

The V5 and the other stuff matters not one jot. Nobody cares who owns, or taxes or lay fines on a vehicle. If you're driving it, the police want to know that you're insured to do that and an insurance certificate proves that.

Not if the policy to which the certificate relates has been cancelled. I frequently deal with drivers who produce a certificate of insurance which following enquiry with the insurance company is found to no longer relate to a valid policy. These drivers get charged (and convicted) with no insurance.

LoonR1 said:

Hiding behind the "it was in force when issued" comment is flawed as the insurer remains de facto insurer under the RTA anyway, until the certificate is returned if the policy is cancelled, irrespective of by whom.

How do you explain the fact that drivers get convicted of offences in terms of section 143 RTA after the policy has been voided/cancelled (for non-payment/not providing proof of no claims etc.) when they are still in possession of the certificate?

Cat

[Cat]

Red Devil said:

Another point to consider. AFAIK RTA Section 147(1)- http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/sectio... - has not been repealed.
Many people are unaware that, despite what askMid may say, the policy is not effected until you have received a valid certificate.
So having it with you early doors would be a good start.

s.147 of the RTA was amended in 2010 by The Motor Vehicles (Electronic Communication of Certificates of Insurance) Order 2010. You can now receive an insurance certificate electronically or by being provided access to it on a website.

Cat