"Use to secure the release of a motor vehicle..."
Discussion
Jazoli said:
jeremyc said:
No. I believe it means you can't help your friend out by collecting their impounded car and driving it away yourself under your own insurance policy.
There's no restriction on giving them a lift to the pound to collect their own car.
Is correct.There's no restriction on giving them a lift to the pound to collect their own car.
As above its so that you cannot get a mates uninsured car released under your insurance cover. The owner/keeper has to insure it themselves.
Driving them there plays no part in getting it released.
The wording is to close a loophole where an impounded car for no insurance ( also other reasons) could be released to someone to drive under their insurance. Hence the actual owner getting a mate to pick it up, saving the owner getting it insured and recommitting an offence. The actual owner had to produce proof of insurance. Costs were then calculated( recovery plus storage) be paid.
I can’t remember if selling the car got round this but think it couldn’t.
I can’t remember if selling the car got round this but think it couldn’t.
sospan said:
The wording is to close a loophole where an impounded car for no insurance ( also other reasons) could be released to someone to drive under their insurance. Hence the actual owner getting a mate to pick it up, saving the owner getting it insured and recommitting an offence. The actual owner had to produce proof of insurance. Costs were then calculated( recovery plus storage) be paid.
I can’t remember if selling the car got round this but think it couldn’t.
You can sell a car that has been seized, new owner would then be liable for the costs. Happens fairly often. I guess the new owner gets a cheap deal? I can’t remember if selling the car got round this but think it couldn’t.
It wouldn't work if you had your car seized, you sold it to me and I tried to use my DOC cover to collect it. I own both cars so it won't work.
My nephew had his car (wrongly) impounded ...another case of a police officer not knowing traffic law correctly, but that's another story (see 'flip-up plates' thread)
When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
Edited by TwinKam on Tuesday 17th October 19:49
Mandat said:
Does anyone know what is special about these "special policies" that are required to release a car from a pound?
Also, why does the standard policy exclude release from a pound, if the policy is for the car in question?
My policy says ‘This Certificate cannot be used to secure the release of a vehicle, other than the vehicle identified above by its registration mark, which has been seized by, or on behalf of, any government or public authority.’ Which I think makes it pretty clear that, at least in this instance, it can be used to release the insured vehicle. Also, why does the standard policy exclude release from a pound, if the policy is for the car in question?
TwinKam said:
My nephew had his car (wrongly) impounded ...another case of a police officer not knowing traffic law correctly, but that's another story (see 'flip-up plates' thread)
When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
It's quite common to have to have compound insurance. We put it on our 165 paperwork that we hand to the driver and owner of the vehicle that has been seized (we don't recommend though). When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
Edited by TwinKam on Tuesday 17th October 19:49
Not all policies cover release from a compound which is why the above will be needed. The cheaper ones don't tend to.
LosingGrip said:
It's quite common to have to have compound insurance. We put it on our 165 paperwork that we hand to the driver and owner of the vehicle that has been seized (we don't recommend though).
Not all policies cover release from a compound which is why the above will be needed. The cheaper ones don't tend to.
Do you know what is special about "compound insurance" and why not all regular policies allow release from a compound?Not all policies cover release from a compound which is why the above will be needed. The cheaper ones don't tend to.
I don't believe it for a minute. The need is for the car to be insured to get it released. So if your go and buy a normal insurance policy it doesn't exclude that. If it did it works be nuts.
Anyone got actual policy wording they think does this?
ETA day insurance and other niche policies may exclude. But normal run of the mill, 1 year policies don't
Anyone got actual policy wording they think does this?
ETA day insurance and other niche policies may exclude. But normal run of the mill, 1 year policies don't
Mandat said:
Do you know what is special about "compound insurance" and why not all regular policies allow release from a compound?
The cynical part of me thinks its a way for the insurance company to get extra money...https://www.comparethemarket.com/car-insurance/con...
TwinKam said:
My nephew had his car (wrongly) impounded ...another case of a police officer not knowing traffic law correctly, but that's another story (see 'flip-up plates' thread)
When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
What a rip off!When he went to collect it, he was told by the desk sergeant that his insurance did not cover him to drive it out of the pound, and he was offered the use of their 'phone to arrange special insurance for the purpose... with a firm suggested by them.
Naively, stressed and obviously on the back foot because of the situation, he complied.
I thought this very odd as I had not heard of that exclusion, but this was after the event.
This thread clarifies the position for me, thank you, so it only relates to a tp collecting an uninsured vehicle on behalf of an uninsured owner?
It makes me so angry; the compounding of the wrong done to him that week by the police, through their ignorance of laws that they are supposed to know and know well. The whole episode cost him around £1500 as he was in the middle of nowhere when it was seized; transport home, loss of 2 days work (and very nearly his job), transport to the pound, release fee, plus about £600 IIRC for this 'special insurance'...
Oh, he got an apology and a private offer to repay 'whatever he was out of pocket' in an unofficial call from the traffic officer involved... an offer which promptly evaporated once the level of his loss was revealed. Unfortunately, he was so stressed out about the whole episode (and concerned that he would be targeted whenever back in the area) that he didn't have the stomach to take the matter further.
If you happen to read this, the individuals concerned, hang your heads in shame.
Edited by TwinKam on Tuesday 17th October 19:49
Happened to someone I know, removed without tax, insurance or MOT, nearly without payment as was next to an open gate.
Contracted cheapest local transport indie with van flatbed and winch, told him he was collecting seized car and he said he gets loads as company want a fortune to transport anything, they checked nothing from him (was just told collecting with another recovery company), owner went in and showed ID then paid and it was unloaded and driven away round corner by his dad (his insurance added it to his policy after he realized wasn't covered if none of its own) to booked MOT.
Cost was about 60 quid if I remember as was 2 miles away (from indies base).
So there is a workaround!
Edited by NFT on Tuesday 17th October 23:50
Mandat said:
Does anyone know what is special about these "special policies" that are required to release a car from a pound?
Also, why does the standard policy exclude release from a pound, if the policy is for the car in question?
The only thing that seems to be "special" is that you're over a barrel and the insurance companies know it.Also, why does the standard policy exclude release from a pound, if the policy is for the car in question?
I don't memorise all my policy wording, but feel it covers release of my car, but not other cars. I generally buy the cheapest insurance policy possible, as do most people i suspect.
It's sad that that "flip up numberplate thread" guy feels under threat of reprisals from the thin blue line - a few bad apples still exist it seems...
djohnson said:
My policy says ‘This Certificate cannot be used to secure the release of a vehicle, other than the vehicle identified above by its registration mark, which has been seized by, or on behalf of, any government or public authority.’ Which I think makes it pretty clear that, at least in this instance, it can be used to release the insured vehicle.
This. Your policy will secure the release of your insured car.It’s likely many will also insure you to drive other cars, but not to release them if uninsured.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff