Caught with no insurance after midnight expiry
Discussion
Durzel said:
Giving the OP's friend's son the benefit of the doubt, if he was told on the phone that his policy "runs out on Saturday" (the exact wording on the call is critical, although I'd venture that being told it runs out "at midnight on Saturday" is equally ambiguous as can be seen from this thread), then being pulled at 00:05 with no insurance is especially harsh.
As far as I can see it he has two options:
1) Ask the insurance company to indemnify him for that Saturday (as in up to 23:59:59), on the basis of a misleading phone call (assuming it was).
2) Make a statement to the judge in court and hope it is taken into consideration. I can't see this working at all - onus on driver to make sure they're insured on every single trip, etc.
1) is vastly more preferable, but it does hinge on what was said on the phone call. I would suggest it would be surprising, though not impossible, for the agent on the phone to have not been explicit as to when it expired, although as said above "midnight Saturday" is clearly something that catches people out.
+1 I'd have been caught out too.As far as I can see it he has two options:
1) Ask the insurance company to indemnify him for that Saturday (as in up to 23:59:59), on the basis of a misleading phone call (assuming it was).
2) Make a statement to the judge in court and hope it is taken into consideration. I can't see this working at all - onus on driver to make sure they're insured on every single trip, etc.
1) is vastly more preferable, but it does hinge on what was said on the phone call. I would suggest it would be surprising, though not impossible, for the agent on the phone to have not been explicit as to when it expired, although as said above "midnight Saturday" is clearly something that catches people out.
RyanOPlasty said:
He only broke the law in a "Specific and Limited" way, I thought there was a recently introduced exemption for this?
That's the best defence suggested so far. Young lad should go to caught, explain this, and that his lawbreaking was completely within the govt's own guidelines for acceptable breaches of the law.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
RyanOPlasty said:
He only broke the law in a "Specific and Limited" way, I thought there was a recently introduced exemption for this?
That's the best defence suggested so far. Young lad should go to caught, explain this, and that his lawbreaking was completely within the govt's own guidelines for acceptable breaches of the law.
I had this years ago, previous policy was 0001- 2359 and the new policy was 1200 - 1159. Got 6 points but no fine as it was considered that there were mitigating circumstances as my argument that I never intended not to be insured and had activated the new policy which proved it. However 6 points would have been a totting up ban.
I appealed it.
Went to Crown court and represented myself. Turned it into 28 days disqualification (luckily I was at sea for that whole period).
Bugger was I had to declare that for the next 5 years. So banned either way.
It's almost impossible to wiggle out of because you were not insured, and YOU are responsible to make sure you are.
I appealed it.
Went to Crown court and represented myself. Turned it into 28 days disqualification (luckily I was at sea for that whole period).
Bugger was I had to declare that for the next 5 years. So banned either way.
It's almost impossible to wiggle out of because you were not insured, and YOU are responsible to make sure you are.
CAPP0 said:
Terminator X said:
Talk about unlucky, stopped 5 mins after insurance lapses yet I've not been stopped in perhaps 20 years.
TX.
That's ANPR for you.TX.
I renewed immediately and all was well with the world. Technically I was absolutely bang to rights
WinstonWolf said:
I was pinged by ANPR, my insurance had lagged by a VERY large margin as I didn't get a renewal notice thanks to Covid.
I'm always amazed people leave stuff this important to chance, relying on a reminder from a third party. My insurance/tax/mot dates are in my phone calendar, on my old skool calendar in the kitchen, and in my wife's phone. TwigtheWonderkid said:
WinstonWolf said:
I was pinged by ANPR, my insurance had lagged by a VERY large margin as I didn't get a renewal notice thanks to Covid.
I'm always amazed people leave stuff this important to chance, relying on a reminder from a third party. My insurance/tax/mot dates are in my phone calendar, on my old skool calendar in the kitchen, and in my wife's phone. As has been touched upon by another poster, the use of language by the insurers does create some confusion.
This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
jondude said:
As has been touched upon by another poster, the use of language by the insurers does create some confusion.
This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
It is unlikely that the policy/certificate does not show a time at which cover ceases.This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I'm always amazed people leave stuff this important to chance, relying on a reminder from a third party. My insurance/tax/mot dates are in my phone calendar, on my old skool calendar in the kitchen, and in my wife's phone.
You work in insurance though don't you?My dogs microchips are all correct, they're all wearing engraved collars and their vaccines are up to date. Given I work in a dog shelter I can at least manage to get that right. I've no idea when my insurance expires though
vonhosen said:
It is unlikely that the policy/certificate does not show a time at which cover ceases.
True as they do indeed show the time to the second. Just thinking it could be worth a go but yes, does not change the fact the actual document would have made things abundantly clear and the onus is upon the driver to be sure the policy is active when driving.
jondude said:
As has been touched upon by another poster, the use of language by the insurers does create some confusion.
This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
Being pedantic - they wouldn't (and can't) offer a backdated certificate, but they can provide a letter of indemnity to say that they would have covered the son for third party risks at the time of the stop, which would essentially invalidate the no insurance charge.This has me thinking it is very likely the call was recorded and so now there is an opening for the lad to request a senior manager listens and perhaps agrees they could give him cover for the extra day. The company did not specify the actual stop time beyond the day mentioned and looking at it objectively there has to be some sympathy a busy 18 year old lad would read 'Saturday' as meaning 'including Saturday'.
Has to be worth a go. I think he has a very good chance of the insurers agreeing they could have done better - but whether they will go the extra mile and issue backdated cover is still a bit iffy.
Not sure if it is still applicable but they could perhaps agree road traffic act cover only, so as to negate the fear they understandably have that giving back cover will lead to a massive claim.
Depending on the wording on the phone call they might be inclined to do this.
wazztie16 said:
Letter from employer stating he was needed to stay and help out and with it being busy he hadn't fully considered/thought about his insurance situation on he night?
Would that help in court?
No, since he didn't have to drive past the point he knew he wasn't insured. His employer didn't make him drive. Would that help in court?
As far as I know there is only one actual defence to driving whilst uninsured and if you're driving a company vehicle as an employee with the expectation that you are insured. For everything else the onus is on you to be certain that you are insured before driving.
Only on PH would you find so many people who can’t tell the time. 
Midnight on Saturday is 00:00... how do people not know this? No one seems to get confused on New Year’s Eve so why is this any different?
That comment aside... the first letter an insurance company sends you after purchase advises you to check your policy documents and contact them if anything is incorrect, or indeed if anything is not as you expected.
The OP’s friend’s son had the opportunity at that point to call them and say “I’ve just looked at my documents and I thought midnight on Saturday Xth meant I would have the full Saturday, not only until 23:59 on the Friday. Please can I have this extended?”
He did not. And obviously, why would he? That date is a year away, and was probably of no concern.
However, he also had the opportunity to re-clarify the time of expiry when he contacted them about letting the policy end.
The agent on the phone gave him a friendly reminder of “remember it expires on Saturday” which is casual language but the point remains that the date and time of expiry has not changed since the policy began.
On this basis I’d imagine the insurers wouldn’t be willing to indemnify him for the full Saturday.
Worth a shot though I suppose. IN10 is a hideous conviction to have from such an unlucky mistake.
Feel sorry for your friend’s son, OP.
Midnight on Saturday is 00:00... how do people not know this? No one seems to get confused on New Year’s Eve so why is this any different?
That comment aside... the first letter an insurance company sends you after purchase advises you to check your policy documents and contact them if anything is incorrect, or indeed if anything is not as you expected.
The OP’s friend’s son had the opportunity at that point to call them and say “I’ve just looked at my documents and I thought midnight on Saturday Xth meant I would have the full Saturday, not only until 23:59 on the Friday. Please can I have this extended?”
He did not. And obviously, why would he? That date is a year away, and was probably of no concern.
However, he also had the opportunity to re-clarify the time of expiry when he contacted them about letting the policy end.
The agent on the phone gave him a friendly reminder of “remember it expires on Saturday” which is casual language but the point remains that the date and time of expiry has not changed since the policy began.
On this basis I’d imagine the insurers wouldn’t be willing to indemnify him for the full Saturday.
Worth a shot though I suppose. IN10 is a hideous conviction to have from such an unlucky mistake.
Feel sorry for your friend’s son, OP.
Algarve said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I'm always amazed people leave stuff this important to chance, relying on a reminder from a third party. My insurance/tax/mot dates are in my phone calendar, on my old skool calendar in the kitchen, and in my wife's phone.
You work in insurance though don't you?Am I correct in thinking the car would simply show up as ‘uninsured’ and not as ‘insurance has just run out’.
If the insurance ran out at midnight wouldn’t it simply disappear from the database altogether?
It would be them up to the police whether they believed the lads story or not. That might have some bearing on whether they decided to take it further.
Bennet said:
I don't undertstand how retrospective "back dated" cover could be a real thing. Otherwise, just call a short term insurer and ask for back dated cover for that day. Since there were no crashes, presumably they'll happily take his money.
It's illegal for an insurer to provide a backdated insurance certificate.His previous insurer can provide a letter of indemnity to say that they would have covered TP risks at the time he was stopped. This has the effect of invalidating the "driving without insurance" charge.
Whether they will or not is a matter of debate.. they would be inclined to in the event that they made a mistake, or there is some dispute as to who did, but in the event that the policy simply ended they may decide not to. Again, it rather hinges on what was said on that phone call I think.
To be clear - the insurer providing a letter of indemnity is an extraordinary thing, it is not done as a matter of course.
Edited by Durzel on Monday 21st September 17:53
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff