Rec'd letter from MID: car uninsured but premium paid

[Riley Blue]

Odd one this (to me at least). This morning I received a letter from the Head of Customer Operations at MID (the Motor Insurers' Bureau) advising my '63 Riley isn't showing on their database and could I remedy it within 28 days to avoid a fine.

The thing is, I paid the 25-26 premium at the end of May, have a Certificate of Motor Insurance that expires in May 2026 and have been driving the car, oblivious of any problem, for the last few months.

I've phoned my insurer who is looking into it but should I be stopped, what would the likely outcome be? I carry a copy of the certificate with me when out in the car and the payment shows in on-line banking.

[CHLEMCBC]

Does the letter no offer any advice? I would avoid driving it.

[Bill]

I expect it's an oversight by your insurer. I'd carry the certificate in the meantime but the likelihood of being stopped is minimal.

[kestral]

Riley Blue said:

Odd one this (to me at least). This morning I received a letter from the Head of Customer Operations at MID (the Motor Insurers' Bureau) advising my '63 Riley isn't showing on their database and could I remedy it within 28 days to avoid a fine.

The thing is, I paid the 25-26 premium at the end of May, have a Certificate of Motor Insurance that expires in May 2026 and have been driving the car, oblivious of any problem, for the last few months.

I've phoned my insurer who is looking into it but should I be stopped, what would the likely outcome be? I carry a copy of the certificate with me when out in the car and the payment shows in on-line banking.

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

What is the fine for?

[Riley Blue]

kestral said:

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

What is the fine for?

Not specified but driving w/o insurance presumably.

If I get stopped I'll tell them kestral says it's OK.

[pigface1001]

Contact your insureance, tell them what you told us, they will sort it out

[ralphrj]

kestral said:

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

Are you sure? If I take out a policy, receive the certificate but then cancel the direct debit then all will be fine as I still have the certificate?

Your contributions are as useful as ever.

[otolith]

kestral said:

What is the fine for?

Presumably breach of the continuous insurance requirement.

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/uninsured-veh...

[the cueball]

I had something similar recently, no letter from the MID, but I found out my vehicle wasn't on the database.

I had the certificate, paid up front too.

Basically what happened was someone within the company (Bemoto) took a dislike to me after a complaint phone call and decided to take the vehicle off my multi cover.

I didn't get a notice of this either from phone, text, email, refund - nothing..so they got around their own systems somehow to de insure it.

I had been using the vehicle for months without it being insured.

I only noticed as my renewal came in very cheap and I noticed it wasn't listed!

[Dixy]

Have you checked the registration numbers match, would not be the first time someone miss types.

[MustangGT]

kestral said:

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

[Simpo Two]

the cueball said:

Basically what happened was someone within the company (Bemoto) took a dislike to me after a complaint phone call and decided to take the vehicle off my multi cover.

If that's true the 'someone' should do jailtime IMHO.

[SmoothCriminal]

kestral said:

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

Don't think that's the case as you could just cancel the direct debit and still have the certificate.

Pretty sure there was a thread on here about a copper who wouldn't take anything other the the MID database as gospel and seized the car late at night even though the op was insured.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

I think Kestral means a valid certificate of insurance overrides the MID, which it does. Obviously if you've cancelled your insurance, the certificate isn't valid. But if you've paid for insurance, and have a certificate, and you haven't cancelled, then the issue is admin between your insurer and the MID, and you are still insured.

[Sheepshanks]

SmoothCriminal said:

Don't think that's the case as you could just cancel the direct debit and still have the certificate.

Pretty sure there was a thread on here about a copper who wouldn't take anything other the the MID database as gospel and seized the car late at night even though the op was insured.

The Certificate doesn't seem to carry the same weight these days - you weren't supposed to drive in the olden says until you had the certicate in hand, and you were asked for it back if you cancelled a policy.

[MustangGT]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I think Kestral means a valid certificate of insurance overrides the MID, which it does. Obviously if you've cancelled your insurance, the certificate isn't valid. But if you've paid for insurance, and have a certificate, and you haven't cancelled, then the issue is admin between your insurer and the MID, and you are still insured.

Probably what was meant, but, not what was written.

[jeremyh1]

I run quite a few vehicles

I have had this letter a few times I just ignore it . It might be wise to double check with your insurers if you so wish

I would like to know just who the hell these people think they are

[Riley Blue]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I think Kestral means a valid certificate of insurance overrides the MID, which it does. Obviously if you've cancelled your insurance, the certificate isn't valid. But if you've paid for insurance, and have a certificate, and you haven't cancelled, then the issue is admin between your insurer and the MID, and you are still insured.

Thanks, that sums the situation accurately i.e. I've paid, have the certificate, haven't cancelled it and my insurer is investigating but as the police use MID for roadside insurance checks who will they believe, the database or me?

[otolith]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I think Kestral means a valid certificate of insurance overrides the MID, which it does. Obviously if you've cancelled your insurance, the certificate isn't valid. But if you've paid for insurance, and have a certificate, and you haven't cancelled, then the issue is admin between your insurer and the MID, and you are still insured.

The question is less, though, whether you are insured, than whether Plod is going to accept your certificate or take a "computer says no" attitude and have you towed.

[Aretnap]

SmoothCriminal said:

kestral said:

You are OK to Drive. The certificate over rides everything including the MIB data base.

Don't think that's the case as you could just cancel the direct debit and still have the certificate.

Pretty sure there was a thread on here about a copper who wouldn't take anything other the the MID database as gospel and seized the car late at night even though the op was insured.

For a seizure to be lawful, three conditions have to be met:
(1) The officer must demand that you show him your insurance certificate
(2) You must fail to produce it AND
(3) He must have a reasonable belief that you were driving without insurance

Obviously if you get a cop who thinks that the MID is handed down by God on tablets of stone (clue: it isn't), waving your insurance certificate at him won't physically stop him seizing the car. However if he thinks the certificate you're waving is invalid he'd better be damned sure that he's right, because if it turns out that it is valid then his seizure of the car will automatically be unlawful.

I don't remember the thread you're talking about but if your memory is correct then the copper was exceeding his powers and the police would have been liable for refunding the impound fees, along with his taxi fares and any other losses resulting from the unlawful seizure. Whereas if he'd failed to produce his certificate then in all probability the seizure would have been lawful, and he would have been reliant to the goodwill of the police to get anything back at all.