Banned 6 months, £180-00, 8 Points
Discussion
Someone I know (really - there is no way that would be me) has just got the above.
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary.
I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary. I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
The fine is pretty pathetic considering the cost of insurance nowadays, not much of an insentive to buy insurance in the first place.
Seems like a misguided system really, With the points any insurance he tries to get in the future is going to be sky high, so this makes him even more likely to drive without it again.
Seems like a misguided system really, With the points any insurance he tries to get in the future is going to be sky high, so this makes him even more likely to drive without it again.
NugentS said:
Someone I know (really - there is no way that would be me) has just got the above.
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary.
I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary. I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
I was banned for 7 weeks and 6 days (wow, 1 day off the maximum for pleading guilty!) and it didn't half drag on a bit. 6 months would feel like an eternity to me.
paul99 said:
The fine is pretty pathetic considering the cost of insurance nowadays, not much of an insentive to buy insurance in the first place.
Seems like a misguided system really, With the points any insurance he tries to get in the future is going to be sky high, so this makes him even more likely to drive without it again.
Seems like a misguided system really, With the points any insurance he tries to get in the future is going to be sky high, so this makes him even more likely to drive without it again.
Do insurance companies increase the premium based on the number of points rather than the specific offences? I mean the offence of driving without insurance shouldn’t affect the risk or premium unlike say red light, careless or speeding which are actual driving offences.
herewego said:
Do insurance companies increase the premium based on the number of points rather than the specific offences? I mean the offence of driving without insurance shouldn’t affect the risk or premium unlike say red light, careless or speeding which are actual driving offences.
It's done by offense code - any offence that conveys dishonesty rather than a heavy right foot will be weighted more heavily IIRC.
The problem with people who think they can beat the system and avoid paying for insurance etc. is that it probably doesn't stop there.......
Does this kind of 'rascal' also not pay his/her road tax, and also not bother MOT'ing his/her car and/or replacing worn brake pads, discs etc.
It makes me fill with rage... how would you feel if your P&J was in an accident with an un-insured vehicle? Plus, it just puts the cost up for the rest of us.
This may seem like a draconian measure, but it's about time the law was changed and the car confiscated and crushed.
Just my humble opinion
Spike
Does this kind of 'rascal' also not pay his/her road tax, and also not bother MOT'ing his/her car and/or replacing worn brake pads, discs etc.
It makes me fill with rage... how would you feel if your P&J was in an accident with an un-insured vehicle? Plus, it just puts the cost up for the rest of us.
This may seem like a draconian measure, but it's about time the law was changed and the car confiscated and crushed.
Just my humble opinion
Spike
thinfourth said:
Okay boys and girls
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Why do you think 2m people in the UK drive w/o insurance?!?
And why so many people continue to drive while banned, or with a provisional?!?
The courts seem unwilling or unable to take a tough-enough line to deter it. And the paucity of police on the roads makes detection (let alone subsequent prosecution) unlikely.
IMHO, another example of where the state fails to have any grasp on reality.
Rest assured that as a BiB myself and my colleagues will continue to seize uninsured cars daily whenever we get the opportunity. This I feel has a greater deterrent aspect than the often low fines dished out.
There's been a lot of dodgy legislation recently, but the power to seize vehicles is sterling!!!
There's been a lot of dodgy legislation recently, but the power to seize vehicles is sterling!!!
havoc said:
thinfourth said:
Okay boys and girls
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Why do you think 2m people in the UK drive w/o insurance?!?
And why so many people continue to drive while banned, or with a provisional?!?
The courts seem unwilling or unable to take a tough-enough line to deter it. And the paucity of police on the roads makes detection (let alone subsequent prosecution) unlikely.
IMHO, another example of where the state fails to have any grasp on reality.
I think the state funded ANPR system combined with the MIB database is more likely to tackle the problem than the police cruising the roads.
herewego said:
havoc said:
thinfourth said:
Okay boys and girls
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Why do you think 2m people in the UK drive w/o insurance?!?
And why so many people continue to drive while banned, or with a provisional?!?
The courts seem unwilling or unable to take a tough-enough line to deter it. And the paucity of police on the roads makes detection (let alone subsequent prosecution) unlikely.
IMHO, another example of where the state fails to have any grasp on reality.
I think the state funded ANPR system combined with the MIB database is more likely to tackle the problem than the police cruising the roads.
How do they stop said "uninsured" car from proceding without Plod on the road?The ANPR and MIB can identify but can't apprehend.
esselte said:
herewego said:
havoc said:
thinfourth said:
Okay boys and girls
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Why do you think 2m people in the UK drive w/o insurance?!?
And why so many people continue to drive while banned, or with a provisional?!?
The courts seem unwilling or unable to take a tough-enough line to deter it. And the paucity of police on the roads makes detection (let alone subsequent prosecution) unlikely.
IMHO, another example of where the state fails to have any grasp on reality.
I think the state funded ANPR system combined with the MIB database is more likely to tackle the problem than the police cruising the roads.
How do they stop said "uninsured" car from proceding without Plod on the road?The ANPR and MIB can identify but can't apprehend.
Well of course there are trafpol using ANPR to target uninsured cars. More effective than cruising around looking for a likely offender. If you don't see trafpol on the roads it's probably because they're targeting a particular location with ANPR. I'm sure they catch a lot more that way. If they didn't, I don't think they'd be using it.
herewego said:
esselte said:
herewego said:
havoc said:
thinfourth said:
Okay boys and girls
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Who is paying less then £180 a year on insurance stand up and be counted
I certainly ain't
So the question who is thick here??????????????
Why do you think 2m people in the UK drive w/o insurance?!?
And why so many people continue to drive while banned, or with a provisional?!?
The courts seem unwilling or unable to take a tough-enough line to deter it. And the paucity of police on the roads makes detection (let alone subsequent prosecution) unlikely.
IMHO, another example of where the state fails to have any grasp on reality.
I think the state funded ANPR system combined with the MIB database is more likely to tackle the problem than the police cruising the roads.
How do they stop said "uninsured" car from proceding without Plod on the road?The ANPR and MIB can identify but can't apprehend.
Well of course there are trafpol using ANPR to target uninsured cars. More effective than cruising around looking for a likely offender. If you don't see trafpol on the roads it's probably because they're targeting a particular location with ANPR. I'm sure they catch a lot more that way. If they didn't, I don't think they'd be using it.
I'm confused now,I thought you meant ANPR was better than traffpol?
NugentS said:
his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary.
I think the problem is that certain people think driving is some form of human right to which everyone is entitled. It isn't! It's a privilege! If you can't do it to an acceptable standard, or can't afford to do it, then I'm afraid you're not allowed to! I've often thought that I'd enjoy yachting. Unfortunately I can't afford a yacht, but I don't go out and steal one because I fancy a sail!
Willfully (i.e. discounting renewal oversights, etc.) driving with no insurance should result in a LONG ban. Driving whilst banned, which is akin to jumping up on the bench and waving your tackle in the Magistrate's face, should result in a custodial sentence. That'll stop them.
And the comment about fining uninsured drivers being pointless is spot on. Fine payments are means tested, and those without the means to pay for the privilege of driving(tm) won't be pay any fines.
NugentS said:
Someone I know (really - there is no way that would be me) has just got the above.
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary.
I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
His offense: Driving with no insurance - for the second time
ing Pratt. God I hope he will learn something from this. I am fairly certain he won't drive during the ban but his major problem is that he can't afford (from time to time) the insurance so just drives without it till he can with no thought to consequence - its like that word isn't even in his vocabulary. I have no comment on the punishment other than I think he deserves it.
Sean
He's a prick.
How about he just gets the bus then?
Sorry but he's a class A prick.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff