Removing IN10 from licence?

[Motoring12345]

My father is disabled and has recently applied for a car on the Motability scheme as his own car has reached the end of its life and money is tight due to his OAP status.

In 2022, he received an IN10 due to an honest mistake. He was insured on his own car, but we mistakenly believed he was also covered to drive mine. As I usually handle the admin in the family, I had told him he was covered when, in fact, his insurance didn’t include third-party driving. He accepted the points at the time, but unfortunately, this is now preventing him from being added to the Motability insurance. The points have expired but are in the 1 year "endorsement" period, but Motability say he will be able to drive once that's removed, which will be in March next year.

I’ve explored whether we could insure him separately at our own cost, but this isn’t permitted.

I was wondering if there is any way or shape we can try to argue his case and get this IN10 removed due to his disability as a mitigating circumstance. He has a rare genetic condition called Epidermolysis bullosa simplex, and without a car, his life is pretty much at a standstill.

I'd appreciate any advice - thanks

Edited by Motoring12345 on Monday 14th April 15:48

[sunbeam alpine]

It might be less painful to try to squeeze another year of life out of his current car, unless that's totally impossible/impractical.

[Motoring12345]

sunbeam alpine said:

It might be less painful to try to squeeze another year of life out of his current car, unless that's totally impossible/impractical.

It's scrapped now - not an ideal situation.

[sunbeam alpine]

Motoring12345 said:

It's scrapped now - not an ideal situation.

Maybe buy a really cheap banger for a year until the record lapses?

I'm not posting to be contrary . I had the embarrassing situation of the DVLA totally losing any record of my (old green paper) driving licence a few years back. Apparently quite a few thousand licences were "lost" during a system upgrade in the early 2000's and their first response was to deny any knowledge of my ever having held any kind of licence. What saved me were 3 endorsements for speeding filled in in the late 80's/early 90's - they had to accept that my licence had been checked and found to be genuine on at least 3 separate occasions by both police and courts (I wasn't hanging around each time! )

My experience dealing with the DVLA makes me convinced that trying anything online/via e-mail is amazingly frustrating - and you're never updated whenever anything changes (unlike the Passport Office). If you're lucky enough to get anyone on the telephone it really depends on the attitude/ability of the person you get but they are mostly pretty useless.

YMMV

[MustangGT]

Motoring12345 said:

My father is disabled and has recently applied for a car on the Motability scheme as his own car has reached the end of its life and money is tight due to his OAP status.

In 2022, he received an IN10 due to an honest mistake. He was insured on his own car, but we mistakenly believed he was also covered to drive mine. As I usually handle the admin in the family, I had told him he was covered when, in fact, his insurance didn’t include third-party driving. He accepted the points at the time, but unfortunately, this is now preventing him from being added to the Motability insurance. The points have expired but are in the 1 year "endorsement" period, but Motability say he will be able to drive once that's removed, which will be in March next year.

I’ve explored whether we could insure him separately at our own cost, but this isn’t permitted.

I was wondering if there is any way or shape we can try to argue his case and get this IN10 removed due to his disability as a mitigating circumstance. He has a rare genetic condition called Epidermolysis bullosa simplex, and without a car, his life is pretty much at a standstill.

I'd appreciate any advice - thanks

Edited by Motoring12345 on Monday 14th April 15:48

IN10 points remain on the licence for 4 years from date of offence, so, no, they are not yet expired.

https://www.gov.uk/penalty-points-endorsements/end...

I believe a Motability car can be insured in your name, have you tried this with him as a named driver?

[E-bmw]

Motoring12345 said:

My father is disabled and has recently applied for a car on the Motability scheme as his own car has reached the end of its life and money is tight due to his OAP status.

In 2022, he received an IN10 due to an honest mistake.

I hate to point out the obvious but aren't ALL points on everyone's licence "due to an honest mistake"?


(excluding the obvious, as in those that are a dishonest mistake clearly)

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

MustangGT said:

I believe a Motability car can be insured in your name, have you tried this with him as a named driver?

I think OP and family have been in enough bother without adding fronting to the list!

[agtlaw]

MustangGT said:

IN10 points remain on the licence for 4 years from date of offence, so, no, they are not yet expired.

Penalty points expire after 3 years. They are removed after 4 years.

[agtlaw]

Motoring12345 said:

I was wondering if there is any way or shape we can try to argue his case and get this IN10 removed due to his disability as a mitigating circumstance.

No.

[Aretnap]

You can't get the endorsement removed early. The DVLA have no role in the process beyond being a record keeper - they have no discretion over how long to keep the record.

Even if you could, it would still remain a matter of fact that he had been convicted (or got a fixed penalty) and this would still have to be declared to insurers. The only way to avoid the situation would have been not to get the points in the first place.

He *might* just have had grounds to argue for special reasons not to endorse - not because of his disability, but because he was apparently mislead about his insurance status by someone he had reason to trust (ie you). But the time to make that arguement was in 2022, unfortunately. If he was given the endorsement by a court there was a time limit in which he could have appealed; if he accepted a fixed penalty then there is no way to appeal at all after the fact.

Agree with the suggestion that it's worth thinking about getting him a cheap old banger which, if it doesn't fall apart, he can probably sell in a year for key much what he pays for it now.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Aretnap said:

He *might* just have had grounds to argue for special reasons not to endorse - not because of his disability, but because he was apparently mislead about his insurance status by someone he had reason to trust (ie you). But the time to make that arguement was in 2022,

There would have been no point in making it even then. The only exemption from driving with no insurance having been told you are insured is for company car drivers, where they have good reason to accept the info they were given about being insured is correct, and they might not have access to the documentation to check themselves. That aside, it was the driver's responsibility to ensure he was covered, and having been told he had DOC on his insurance by his son, it was still his job to ensure the information was correct.

He was convicted for no insurance because he was driving with no insurance, and legally it was 100% his own fault.

[OldGermanHeaps]

With not having a motability car but being entitled to one that means he must be claiming the higher rate mobility component of the disability living allowance? Surely he could use that money to run a cheap car for a year? Its a decent chunk of change, more than enough to run a sensible but unimpressive shed.
Thats what the money is paid to him for in the first place.
I bought a presentable audi a4 2 years ago for 700 quid. 154 a year insurance. Its not bad on petrol. It has needed 150 quid spent on it to keep it driving sweet and passing mots. Been offered 1200 for it, but dont want to part with it.
Doing something like that until next march is far from a hardship. If you genuinely fked him over with bad advice, maybe put a bit towards it to help out.


The other angle you can pursue is the disabled person doesnt have to be the one who gets the car, the car can go to a carer who drives the disabled person in the car, so maybe you could apply for the car for him with you as the driver and on the motability insurance, then just pay yourselves for a seperate insurance policy for him to drive once you get the car?
Been through this with a family member with a degenerative condition, they initially got the car but as their condition worsened and became unable to drive other family members were insured on the car to drive them around, until they passed away and they had to return the car.

Before he got the motability car he used the extra dla money to put twin 40 dcoe webers and a janspeed exhaust on his car, to have a last bit of fun before the inevitable.

Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Monday 14th April 23:03

[dibblecorse]

agtlaw said:

MustangGT said:

IN10 points remain on the licence for 4 years from date of offence, so, no, they are not yet expired.

Penalty points expire after 3 years. They are removed after 4 years.

and with 99% of insurers need declaring for 5 years.

[Aretnap]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Aretnap said:

He *might* just have had grounds to argue for special reasons not to endorse - not because of his disability, but because he was apparently mislead about his insurance status by someone he had reason to trust (ie you). But the time to make that arguement was in 2022,

There would have been no point in making it even then. The only exemption from driving with no insurance having been told you are insured is for company car drivers, where they have good reason to accept the info they were given about being insured is correct, and they might not have access to the documentation to check themselves. That aside, it was the driver's responsibility to ensure he was covered, and having been told he had DOC on his insurance by his son, it was still his job to ensure the information was correct.

He was convicted for no insurance because he was driving with no insurance, and legally it was 100% his own fault.

You seem to be mixing up special reasons not to endorse with a defence to the charge. You're right that an honest but incorrect belief that you were insured is only a defence if you were driving in the course of your employment, however it can still amount to special reasons not to endorse in other circumstances.

https://collinghamchambers.com/special-reasons

https://www.caineslaw.co.uk/services/driving-offen...

It would ultimately have been up to a court to decide whether there were special reasons in this case - not saying that it would have been an easy arguement to make, but it's not completely beyond the bounds of possibility either. But given the passage of time we'll never know.

Edited by Aretnap on Monday 14th April 22:55

[OutInTheShed]

Motoring12345 said:

....

I'd appreciate any advice - thanks

Edited by Motoring12345 on Monday 14th April 15:48

If you know someone's likely to drive your car, put them down as a named driver.

[OldGermanHeaps]

OutInTheShed said:

If you know someone's likely to drive your car, put them down as a named driver.

Or get set up on cuvva. Its an extremely useful and convenient service.

[agtlaw]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

There would have been no point in making it even then. The only exemption from driving with no insurance having been told you are insured is for company car drivers, where they have good reason to accept the info they were given about being insured is correct, and they might not have access to the documentation to check themselves. That aside, it was the driver's responsibility to ensure he was covered, and having been told he had DOC on his insurance by his son, it was still his job to ensure the information was correct.

He was convicted for no insurance because he was driving with no insurance, and legally it was 100% his own fault.

Wrong.

Ignore this nonsense.

See the posts above regarding special reasons not to endorse.

[agtlaw]

dibblecorse said:

and with 99% of insurers need declaring for 5 years.

Because, for the purposes of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, an endorsement is spent 5 years from the date of conviction.

[agtlaw]

Aretnap said:

You can't get the endorsement removed early. The DVLA have no role in the process beyond being a record keeper - they have no discretion over how long to keep the record.

Even if you could, it would still remain a matter of fact that he had been convicted (or got a fixed penalty) and this would still have to be declared to insurers. The only way to avoid the situation would have been not to get the points in the first place.

He *might* just have had grounds to argue for special reasons not to endorse - not because of his disability, but because he was apparently mislead about his insurance status by someone he had reason to trust (ie you). But the time to make that argument was in 2022, unfortunately. If he was given the endorsement by a court there was a time limit in which he could have appealed; if he accepted a fixed penalty then there is no way to appeal at all after the fact.
.

This is correct. Agree that he should have argued SR back in 2022.

In the unlikely event that the index offence was dealt with by a court (rather than a fixed penalty) then OP could ask for permission to appeal against sentence out-of-time. However, the prospect of leave being granted is slim to nil.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

agtlaw said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

There would have been no point in making it even then. The only exemption from driving with no insurance having been told you are insured is for company car drivers, where they have good reason to accept the info they were given about being insured is correct, and they might not have access to the documentation to check themselves. That aside, it was the driver's responsibility to ensure he was covered, and having been told he had DOC on his insurance by his son, it was still his job to ensure the information was correct.

He was convicted for no insurance because he was driving with no insurance, and legally it was 100% his own fault.

Wrong.

Ignore this nonsense.

See the posts above regarding special reasons not to endorse.

There are special reasons not to endorse but they would not apply in this case. The dad was driving ON HIS OWN INSRANCE. He wasn't an additional driver on someone else's insurance, and had been told by them he was covered. He was using a car knowing he wasn't a named driver on that car's insurance, because he'd been led to believe by someone else that his own policy had a DOC extension.

It was 100% his job to know what his own policy covered. What's the argument, he was too old to organise his own insurance and to understand it? Make that argument, and you get a counter argument that he's too old to drive.

"My son gave me wrong info about my own policy" is not a special reason not to endorse.