friends employers van insurance invalid
Discussion
A semi retired friend does some casual / freelance driving for a few businesses but unknown to him a van belonging to a small business he was driving was invalid, lapsed or not renewed. He was stopped at a roadside check, the van was ceased and my friend is being summoned to appear at court. We think it's likely he'll receive 6 points and because of this wont be able to drive vans for other businesses or hire a van and do his own driving jobs.
He's driven for this business for the last 8 years or so with no problem so there was no need to think the insurance would be invalid etc. Any advice or people heard of similar situations?
He's driven for this business for the last 8 years or so with no problem so there was no need to think the insurance would be invalid etc. Any advice or people heard of similar situations?
LoonR1 said:
Oh look a situation that perfectly fits one of the only acceptable ways for an individual not to be found guilty.
How amazing and from a poster with all of 8 posts in nearly 4 years.
He hoped for the best and took an uninsured van as in over 8 years he hasn't been stopped and now this ...How amazing and from a poster with all of 8 posts in nearly 4 years.
eccles said:
Ultimately it's up to the driver to ensure he's insured and that the vehicle is all legal. If it's not, then he get's stiffed.
wrong I believe as long as the driver reasonably believes the company he is working for has the appropriate insurance he has a defence in law/or precedent (not sure which)Mk3Spitfire said:
LoonR1 said:
Oh look a situation that perfectly fits one of the only acceptable ways for an individual not to be found guilty.
How amazing and from a poster with all of 8 posts in nearly 4 years.
How amazing and from a poster with all of 8 posts in nearly 4 years.
You do remind me of Victor Meldrew!citizensm1th said:
eccles said:
Ultimately it's up to the driver to ensure he's insured and that the vehicle is all legal. If it's not, then he get's stiffed.
wrong I believe as long as the driver reasonably believes the company he is working for has the appropriate insurance he has a defence in law/or precedent (not sure which)Even before that, I always understood it was that way.
eccles said:
Was watching that bastion of legal advice, Police Interceptors last weekend and a lad got done for having a bald tyre and no insurance on a company van. Copper went to great lengths to show that ultimately the driver is responsible for the vehicle he drives.
Even before that, I always understood it was that way.
Responsible for the condition of the vehicle, but there is a defence for absence of insuranceEven before that, I always understood it was that way.
RTA (1998) 143.3 : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/V...
legislation said:
(3)A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of this section shall not be convicted if he proves—
(a)that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,
(b)that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and
(c)that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.
So - the OP's mate needs to have been 1) not the owner or renter of the thing being driven (even though the OP says he was driving a business, let's say it was really a van), 2) employed and driving it as part of his employment and 3) believed that there appropriate cover in place.(a)that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,
(b)that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and
(c)that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.
marshalla said:
Umm, yeah. That.
Maybe.
Or not.
I did say patchy I would not expect a beat bobby to know all about banking fraud just as I would not expect a fraud squad officer to be very hot on maritime policingMaybe.
Or not.
hence the use of the cps in deciding which cases to take to court
which leads me to question the ops story I am very surprised his "friend" is being taken to court given the absolute defence he apparently has. either bulls
t story or big cps cock up both highly possible citizensm1th said:
I did say patchy I would not expect a beat bobby to know all about banking fraud just as I would not expect a fraud squad officer to be very hot on maritime policing
hence the use of the cps in deciding which cases to take to court
which leads me to question the ops story I am very surprised his "friend" is being taken to court given the absolute defence he apparently has. either bullst story or big cps cock up both highly possible
And I have experience of CPS's knowledge of the law when it comes to decisions about prosecutions. There's a lot of diversity.hence the use of the cps in deciding which cases to take to court
which leads me to question the ops story I am very surprised his "friend" is being taken to court given the absolute defence he apparently has. either bulls
t story or big cps cock up both highly possible WTF! Why is everyone suspicious just because I don't post very often?! No need to apologise I guess your lives are so boring or mundane that you get your kicks from being just rude, disrespectful and mistrusting on internet forums... It's a shame because if it weren't for people like you I'd probably be more active here. Reading between the all the handbags you've been swinging around I understand there's a case for his defense which he'll be happy about. As for me I don't drive van's and am not semi retired and you should probably look in to commercial fleet insurance and how vehicles are removed or added before slinging your handbags around again.
paul982 said:
WTF! Why is everyone suspicious just because I don't post very often?! No need to apologise I guess your lives are so boring or mundane that you get your kicks from being just rude, disrespectful and mistrusting on internet forums... It's a shame because if it weren't for people like you I'd probably be more active here. Reading between the all the handbags you've been swinging around I understand there's a case for his defense which he'll be happy about. As for me I don't drive van's and am not semi retired and you should probably look in to commercial fleet insurance and how vehicles are removed or added before slinging your handbags around again.
The lady doth protest too much, methinksForums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff