More authoritarian idiocy - illegal to own uninsured car now

[shakotan]

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car. You wish to sell the car and buy a new one. The car currently has tax. You cannot buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

So you either have to a) have a 'car-less' period between selling your old car and buying the new one, or b) cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it and then transfer the Insurance to your new car whilst waiting to sell the old one, thus devaluing the car for sale.

Both sound like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Insure the new car on a different policy, then cancel after the old one is sold and transfer the policy over.

Then you've wasted X period of money on pointless insurance, by paying for two policies at once, where you only need one.

Not to mention that this temporary new policy will be at full price, because you cannot declare any No Claims bonus which is already being applied to the existing policy...

If you cancel within a month its usually free. The insurance isn't pointless either, how were you going to sell the uninsured car, demand that potential buyers do it or just not let them drive the car until they bought it?

14 days maximum, can you guarantee you'd find the ideal replacement car within that period?

Regarding test drives of your old car, potential buyers would require their own Insurance Policy, with 'drive other car' clause for this to be legal, regardless of the status of a policy on the car itself.

Do YOU insist on seeing proof that a potential buyer is Insured before allowing them behind the wheel?

Edited by shakotan on Saturday 8th January 23:32

[EDLT]

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car. You wish to sell the car and buy a new one. The car currently has tax. You cannot buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

So you either have to a) have a 'car-less' period between selling your old car and buying the new one, or b) cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it and then transfer the Insurance to your new car whilst waiting to sell the old one, thus devaluing the car for sale.

Both sound like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Insure the new car on a different policy, then cancel after the old one is sold and transfer the policy over.

Then you've wasted X period of money on pointless insurance, by paying for two policies at once, where you only need one.

Not to mention that this temporary new policy will be at full price, because you cannot declare any No Claims bonus which is already being applied to the existing policy...

If you cancel within a month its usually free. The insurance isn't pointless either, how were you going to sell the uninsured car, demand that potential buyers do it or just not let them drive the car until they bought it?

14 days maximum, can you guarantee you'd find the ideal replacement car within that period?

Regarding test drives of your old car, potential buyers would require their own 'drive other car' clause for this to be legal, regardless of the status of a policy on the car itself.

You would put the new policy on the new car, and have to sell the old one within 14 days - which is easy.

Normal drive other cars clauses do not allow you to drive uninsured cars, for obvious reasons. Only traders policies would cover them for driving an uninsured car.

EDIT- To answer your last bit, mine get part-exchanged usually. But yes I would ask for proof of insurance and a license, this is not unusual.

Edited by EDLT on Saturday 8th January 23:38

[rypt]

EDLT said:

What if there is a fire, or its stolen, or some scrotes break in and destroy it (as happened to someone on here)?

If it is in a garage that is part of the house then house insurance would cover it surely?

[shakotan]

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car. You wish to sell the car and buy a new one. The car currently has tax. You cannot buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

So you either have to a) have a 'car-less' period between selling your old car and buying the new one, or b) cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it and then transfer the Insurance to your new car whilst waiting to sell the old one, thus devaluing the car for sale.

Both sound like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Insure the new car on a different policy, then cancel after the old one is sold and transfer the policy over.

Then you've wasted X period of money on pointless insurance, by paying for two policies at once, where you only need one.

Not to mention that this temporary new policy will be at full price, because you cannot declare any No Claims bonus which is already being applied to the existing policy...

If you cancel within a month its usually free. The insurance isn't pointless either, how were you going to sell the uninsured car, demand that potential buyers do it or just not let them drive the car until they bought it?

14 days maximum, can you guarantee you'd find the ideal replacement car within that period?

Regarding test drives of your old car, potential buyers would require their own 'drive other car' clause for this to be legal, regardless of the status of a policy on the car itself.

You would put the new policy on the new car, and have to sell the old one within 14 days - which is easy.

Normal drive other cars clauses do not allow you to drive uninsured cars, for obvious reasons. Only traders policies would cover them for driving an uninsured car.

Varies between policies. This has been discussed recently, and I posted excerpts from the T&Cs of several Insurance companies. Some require the other car to be insured for an 'other car' clause to be valid, some do not. My current policy does not require the other vehicle to be insured, just not owned or rented by me.

Anyway, that's only half my point. Do YOU check to see if a potential buyer has proof of insurance before letting them on a test drive

I wouldn't say selling your car within 14 days is easy, unless you got desperate. I bet you could find dozens of people on this board who spent weeks advertising a car before selling it at an acceptable price. Seach the PH classfieds, there are a majority of cars whose adverts are over 14 days old.

Edited by shakotan on Saturday 8th January 23:44

[EDLT]

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

EDLT said:

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car. You wish to sell the car and buy a new one. The car currently has tax. You cannot buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

So you either have to a) have a 'car-less' period between selling your old car and buying the new one, or b) cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it and then transfer the Insurance to your new car whilst waiting to sell the old one, thus devaluing the car for sale.

Both sound like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Insure the new car on a different policy, then cancel after the old one is sold and transfer the policy over.

Then you've wasted X period of money on pointless insurance, by paying for two policies at once, where you only need one.

Not to mention that this temporary new policy will be at full price, because you cannot declare any No Claims bonus which is already being applied to the existing policy...

If you cancel within a month its usually free. The insurance isn't pointless either, how were you going to sell the uninsured car, demand that potential buyers do it or just not let them drive the car until they bought it?

14 days maximum, can you guarantee you'd find the ideal replacement car within that period?

Regarding test drives of your old car, potential buyers would require their own 'drive other car' clause for this to be legal, regardless of the status of a policy on the car itself.

You would put the new policy on the new car, and have to sell the old one within 14 days - which is easy.

Normal drive other cars clauses do not allow you to drive uninsured cars, for obvious reasons. Only traders policies would cover them for driving an uninsured car.

Varies between policies. This has been discussed recently, and I posted excerpts from the T&Cs of several Insurance companies. Some require the other car to be insured for an 'other car' clause to be valid, some do not.

I wouldn't say selling your car within 14 days is easy, unless you got desperate. I bet you could find dozens of people on this board who spent weeks advertising a car before selling it at an acceptable price. Seach the PH classfieds, there are a majority of cars whose adverts are over 14 days old.

I didn't know policies vary, mine have all had drive other cars excluded due to being under 25.

There are a lot of cars in the classifieds that have been advertised for a while, but there has also been many threads where people ask why their car hasn't sold. The answer is ALWAYS because its too expensive.

[Larry Dickman]

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car.

You wish to sell the car and buy a new one.

The car currently has tax.

You cannot simply buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

You could cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it, keep it off road, and buy your new car, transferring the Insurance across, but then you devalue the sale price on the old car?

You could sell the old car, and have a 'car-free' period, whilst looking for the new one, but you'll need to cancel your current Insurance policy early, potentially losing a year's worth of No-Claims, and then start a new policy when youi find your new car.


Sounds like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Edited by shakotan on Saturday 8th January 23:06

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, all you need to do is transfer your insurance to the new car & if the old one isn't sold within 14 days simply declare it as sorn. I don't think it's got any thing to do with the ved so just leave it on the old vehicle. If you sell the old car before you buy another simply inform your insurance so they can put your insurance on hold.

[odyssey2200]

As a fine weater biker, what happens if I do not renew my insurance due to st weather but there is still some Tax left on the bike?

It looks like I will be be breakin gthe Law for not riding the bike in the rain

I now have to surrender the tax and declair it SWORN.

How much extra work is that going to make for the DVLA, who already fk up on a regular basis and
it will make fk all difference to those who drive uninsured cars anyway.

I believe that many of those target by this law not only have no TAx, Insurance, MOT etc but are unlikely to have the V5 in their name anyway.

Anothe fking pointless law that achieves nothing buy make life more difficult for the average, law abiding Joe and completely misses it's goal.

[Mojocvh]

Pothole said:

jbi said:

Does this include cars on private land?

If so... they can sod right off

Read the article and you'll see this:

"Under the new offence of keeping a vehicle while uninsured, the onus will be on drivers to prove that they have insurance, or have completed a statutory off-road notification."

Edited by Pothole on Saturday 8th January 22:54

Don't forget the pending legislation requiring license for kitchen and steak knives, gotta think of the children you know....


Libertarian coalition my ARSE!

[tank slapper]

Mojocvh said:

Don't forget the pending legislation requiring license for kitchen and steak knives, gotta think of the children you know....

Is that a joke? I haven't seen anything about it but I wouldn't be surprised.

[Chris_w666]

Mojocvh said:

Don't forget the pending legislation requiring license for kitchen and steak knives, gotta think of the children you know....


Libertarian coalition my ARSE!

Is that tongue in cheek? They can fk right off if they expect me to insure a car that is in a garage on my property, and they can doubly fk off if they expect me to have a knife license.

[Mojocvh]

Chris_w666 said:

Mojocvh said:

Don't forget the pending legislation requiring license for kitchen and steak knives, gotta think of the children you know....


Libertarian coalition my ARSE!

Is that tongue in cheek?

Very. But it illustrates the point perfectly. Hell I'm supposed to have a certificate for my bloody sporran, how stupid is that.

Edited by Mojocvh on Sunday 9th January 01:03

[shakotan]

Larry Dickman said:

shakotan said:

The problem with this new ruling is thus;

You have a car.

You wish to sell the car and buy a new one.

The car currently has tax.

You cannot simply buy a new car until you've sold your old one, as you cannot transfer the Insurance policy to the new car, and leave the old one uninsured, albeit off the road.

You could cash in the tax on the old car, SORN it, keep it off road, and buy your new car, transferring the Insurance across, but then you devalue the sale price on the old car?

You could sell the old car, and have a 'car-free' period, whilst looking for the new one, but you'll need to cancel your current Insurance policy early, potentially losing a year's worth of No-Claims, and then start a new policy when youi find your new car.


Sounds like a royal pain in the arse to me, for no beneficial reason to anyone.

Edited by shakotan on Saturday 8th January 23:06

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, all you need to do is transfer your insurance to the new car & if the old one isn't sold within 14 days simply declare it as sorn. I don't think it's got any thing to do with the ved so just leave it on the old vehicle. If you sell the old car before you buy another simply inform your insurance so they can put your insurance on hold.

As soon as you transfer your Insurance, the old car becomes illegal as it isn't insured. You can either have a car taxed or SORNed, you can't have both at the same time.

[odyssey2200]

The only way to be safe is to surrender your Tax and SORN you car as soon as the Insurance runs out.

Of course that does not stop you driving it , so the whole thing is pointless.

[Engineer1]

Calm down, it is a step towards stopping uninsured drivers. When I have sold cars privately in the past I have had 2 cars on the same insurance policy, it isn't difficult.

[thinfourth2]

Engineer1 said:

Calm down, it is a step towards stopping uninsured drivers. When I have sold cars privately in the past I have had 2 cars on the same insurance policy, it isn't difficult.

Total bks

Its a step towards getting more convictions not reducing the amount of uninsured drivers.

Before the this law coming in it was illegal to drive a car or keep a car on the road without insurance. People were still driving cars without insurance so they were breaking the law. If they were caught they got a fine that is less then a years insurance.

Now exactly what benefit has come in from fining folk who have never driven or kept their car on the road without insurance.

We don't need more laws we just need to enforce the laws we already have.

What will be interesting to see is how the insurance industry will treat those that get this fine, will they treat it the same as driving without insurance. As all it needs is a not so rare DVLA fk-up and your insurance will sky rocket

[GeraldSmith]

shakotan said:

Regarding test drives of your old car, potential buyers would require their own Insurance Policy, with 'drive other car' clause for this to be legal, regardless of the status of a policy on the car itself.

Do YOU insist on seeing proof that a potential buyer is Insured before allowing them behind the wheel?

I'd insure it myself for them or any driver, relying on them to have insurance is very dodgy. Not only do you run the risk of them wrecking it (their 'other car' clause, if they have one, will be third party only) you also run the risk of a conviction for allowing them to drive without insurance.

Maybe this is one of the circumstances that the legislation is aimed at trying to prevent - people on test drives driving without insurance.

[stitched]

A mate runs a drift school at Oulton.
He currently has, on private land, 2 S14s, 3S13s, 2MX5s and a 350Z.
Currently the DVLA require he sorns all these vehicles at various times of the year and regularly fks up despite him using the online service.
There needs to be a way to withdraw a car from the road for track use, it seems there is no problem if the car has never been taxed but once it has been on the road it is a road car for life.

[thinfourth2]

GeraldSmith said:

Maybe this is one of the circumstances that the legislation is aimed at trying to prevent - people on test drives driving without insurance.

Mmmm people doing something illegal so lets make some more laws

[GeraldSmith]

thinfourth2 said:

GeraldSmith said:

Maybe this is one of the circumstances that the legislation is aimed at trying to prevent - people on test drives driving without insurance.

Mmmm people doing something illegal so lets make some more laws

Actually what it is doing is simplifying the law, it is saying that if you own a car you insure it or you SORN it, end of story. It cuts out all the stuff earlier in the thread about what happens when I'm changing my car and blah, blah, blah. It doesn't prevent people breaking the law but it makes it easy for everyone to know what the law is.

[g3org3y]

article said:

"People say, 'Well, it's sitting outside on the road outside my house. I'm not using it. It's taxed but doesn't need to be insured.'

"It has to be insured, because if someone decides to use it even for an emergency they will not be covered. We are moving fast on that."

Best. Reasoning. EvAr!!!!111eleventy

Incidentally, this law will only affect typically law abiding individuals who forget, or the DVLA fk up. Paperwork exercise which will, without doubt lead to stories in the newspaper of unfairly crushed cars owing to administrative errors.

The proper serial uninsured drivers will continue to drive, sans insurance as ever. And, more than likely without MOT and tax. You must have seen Road Wars where it's the same people, committing the same offences week after week with a slap on the wrist and a further 'ban'.

Edited by g3org3y on Sunday 9th January 10:39