Cops seize ferrari with no insurance!!

[DonkeyApple]

mrmr96 said:

jsc15 said:

5unny said:

Its fairly easy to get insurance over the phone at the roadside providing you have a credit/debit card so would the police accept this?

Sure you may still get the 6 points but at least the car won't be seized.

Insurance can't be backdated though if bought there and then (by a legit company anyway)

Having been uninsured means you get points/fine.
Being uninsured NOW means you get the car taken off you.

Hence Sunny is right, buying over the phone while sat in the back of the plod car won't get you off a ticket, but will let you keep your car.

Let plod set himself up as an tied insurance agent and double his salary through sales comm.

[andye30m3]

Do insurers have to add details to the police insurance database yet?

I thought this was optional and whilst there maybe many cars being driven that are not on the database they are still insured.

I'd also suggest that a database complied by the public sector using data from the insurance industry was hardly likely to be 100% correct.

I expect it's more likely an error on the part of either the insurer or who ever looks after the database than a case of no insurance, Non story to fill up a local paper.

[Trommel]

M-J-B said:

Not sure about that, but my plate is OO05 MJB and my insurance used 0005 MJB

I drove around for a few months with the wrong number plates (one letter out, put on incorrectly by the dealer) - the number on the plates wasn't registered to anything and it wasn't noticed until MOT time.

Quite handy for parking tickets in town (I imagine).

[Digga]

musclecarmad said:

AJS- said:

musclecarmad said:

Any car in Bradford over a value of £40,000 should be stopped.

The owner should prove he has a licence, insurance, a right to be in the country and should also be able to prove just EXACTLY how he bought the car. If he says 'cash' then we need to know what business he has and exactly how much tax he has been paying.

This is what our country needs - much more tougher action and if they can't prove it then the car should be taken and auctioned off.

Are you sure about that? After 13 years of a Labour government we need even more powers to snoop and badger people and raise more revenue. Why on earth should you have to prove how you were able to buy a car?

Yes 100% sure. Because I think at least 50% will have acquired the car illegally. Even if 1 in 20 have acquired it illegally then it is worth it and the people that have nothing to hide have nothing to fear

TBH the Inland Revenue can and should be 'scanning' these sorts of areas for unusual purchases. It's amazing how much snooping they do actually do and how it often leads to convictions.

One difficulty here might be the method of finance and purchase. I have no idea of the Macheavellian agreements possible under Islamic finance - whether the 'owner' (i.e. keeper) of the vehicle is ever necessarily registered as such with the DVLA. (I heard a hair raising story about a Range Rover Sport on a 'lease' from the sales manager at my local Land Rover dealer this week.)

[Vron]

Morningside said:

musclecarmad said:

If any person from down south that lives in a nice part of the world thinks that Bradford is nice then I encourage them to drive around Bradford for a day and I will give them street names to visit...

Or tell us now and we can go for a virtual Google streetmap drive

Here's a nice spot in Bradford to park your Ferrari

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...

[AJS-]

musclecarmad said:

AJS- said:

musclecarmad said:

Any car in Bradford over a value of £40,000 should be stopped.

The owner should prove he has a licence, insurance, a right to be in the country and should also be able to prove just EXACTLY how he bought the car. If he says 'cash' then we need to know what business he has and exactly how much tax he has been paying.

This is what our country needs - much more tougher action and if they can't prove it then the car should be taken and auctioned off.

Are you sure about that? After 13 years of a Labour government we need even more powers to snoop and badger people and raise more revenue. Why on earth should you have to prove how you were able to buy a car?

Yes 100% sure. Because I think at least 50% will have acquired the car illegally. Even if 1 in 20 have acquired it illegally then it is worth it and the people that have nothing to hide have nothing to fear

You could quite possibly say the same for black people, young people, or anyone in a given area. Should they be pulled over all the time too?

I see your point, but IMO the loss of privacy and the potential for abuse do not justify the benefits.

[AJS-]

I'm not saying it is to do with race, it was an example. If you could say statistically that 1/20 BMWs driven by black men were paid for with dodgy money, is that a reason to stop all black men in BMWs?

It's the same sort of inference.

[arfur sleep]

Trommel said:

M-J-B said:

Not sure about that, but my plate is OO05 MJB and my insurance used 0005 MJB

I drove around for a few months with the wrong number plates (one letter out, put on incorrectly by the dealer) - the number on the plates wasn't registered to anything and it wasn't noticed until MOT time.

Quite handy for parking tickets in town (I imagine).

someone at my previous employer was picked up by Special Branch on her way home on a Saturday near a military base in Oxfordshire (i forget which one) a few years ago. Taken immediately to station, interviewed at length and then eventually let go. The reason was that the reg plate the dealer had fitted to her Mercedes CLK actually corresponded to a Ford Transit van - from memory they'd used an E instead of an F. She was not best pleased!