Have I aided and abetted?

[imbecile]

I lent someone my car yesterday, under the (it turns out, incorrect) belief that they were going to get themselves insurance for the day from dayinsure... turns out they didn't and on the way back they were flashed by the world's most visible speed camera.

Assuming that the scammers actually notice that they didn't have insurance (how likely is this?), have I done anything illegal? And if so, is anyone going to bother prosecuting me?

My cynical guess is I'll get a S172, fill it in, my friend will get a S172 and subsequently a FPN with no investigation whatsoever, but this may be incorrect.

[Mikey G]

I was nearly done for aiding and abetting, lent a friend my car who got pulled over. He told the copper at the time he was not insured to drive my car, they come and spoke to me and cautioned me with the view to going to court over it. Turns out the idiot rechecked his policy to find he was covered third party to drive any vehicle not belonging to him etc.. etc.. Maybe you should ask them to closely recheck their policy.

Anyway i doubt insurance would be checked as i have received 2 NIP's and never had to declare my insurance to either of them. I am going back 3 or more years now so maybe with the new police database it may be a different matter.

[bluepolarbear]

Despite the rebranding from speed to safety, the reality is SCP and road safety is based on one thing - your speed. Declare on the NIP and the wheels of the state will swing into action to extract £60 at minimal effort from you.

[jasandjules]

Agreed.

All you have to do is state it was X Person driving and the SCP will get their money, and "safety" will have been improved....

However, you might want to check about insurance in future, because you are liable IIRC as the RK for ensuring anyone using it has a license and insurance.

[julianhj]

The only time you're likely to get HORT/1'd (asked to produce docs) is if you get stopped by a real, live copper or you are involved in an RTC.

[supermono]

I think these camera businesses have enough work to do processing the invoices and banking the profit. The last thing they want is hassle from trivia like uninsured drivers slowing down the process.

SM

[Mr_annie_vxr]

imbecile said:

I lent someone my car yesterday, under the (it turns out, incorrect) belief that they were going to get themselves insurance for the day from dayinsure... turns out they didn't and on the way back they were flashed by the world's most visible speed camera.

Assuming that the scammers actually notice that they didn't have insurance (how likely is this?), have I done anything illegal? And if so, is anyone going to bother prosecuting me?

My cynical guess is I'll get a S172, fill it in, my friend will get a S172 and subsequently a FPN with no investigation whatsoever, but this may be incorrect.

Personaly I would say that as they have told you they are arranging insurance (and that was a condition of you lending them car) and that you have your own insurance on the car you would not be prosecuted for the offence and have not aided and abetted.

editd to add a 'b'

Edited by Mr_annie_vxr on Thursday 30th November 11:35

[kenp]

Aiding and abetting requires intention or at the very least recklessness.

[jasandjules]

kenp said:

Aiding and abetting requires intention or at the very least recklessness.

Cunningham or cauldwell? Just thinking that it could be taken, well, I thought it was taken, that you are required, as the RK, to ensure that your car is insured by whomever is driving?

[Dwight VanDriver]

Aid and abet is knowing the offence is being committed and helping in its commission. Very rarely used for Insurance as the Act covers use, cause or permit, absolute liability.

In the case mentioned permit use without Insurance seems favourite but:

a person does not permit a vehicle to be used uninsured if he allows it to be used only on the express condition that that person would first insure it. [Newbury v Davis (1974)]

It sure seems strange with the records if MIIB be accessible why SCP do not do a check before sending out the Conditional Offer. There could be another £200 FPN for the coffer if non disclosed.

dvd

[imbecile]

Dwight VanDriver said:

It sure seems strange with the records if MIIB be accessible why SCP do not do a check before sending out the Conditional Offer. There could be another £200 FPN for the coffer if non disclosed.

Even had the person had the insurance I thought they had, they wouldn't have shown up on the MIIB as it was a one day thing, (I think). Presumably it's because of situations like that?