Neighbour is driving an uninsured car - advice needed
Discussion
buster1984 said:
im not 100% so some one correct me if im wrong, but if your policy allows you to doc and said car doesnt need a policy holder on it whats stopping me from insuring myself on a crappy 1.0ltr fiesta and then driving around in an unisured ferrari? i always thought the car has to have a policy holder on it. at least that was the case when i sold my last car. 
What would stop you, oh maybe owning £150k of desirable metal and being unable to sleep at night because you saved £1k on your insurance costs 
did you not read the terms and conditions before ticking the box on askmid - if not i'd just stay out of it whats your business is yours and whats his is his - simple
Below are the t's & c's
I am entitled to the insurance information about the vehicle detailed above for one or more of the following reasons: It is either registered/ owned/ insured by me or my employer; I am permitted to drive it; I am an Insurance Broker and acting on behalf of my client.
I understand it is an offence to wrongfully obtain information of this nature without any of the above reasonable causes. If I fail to provide true reasons for acquiring this information I may be committing an offence of unlawfully obtaining data contrary to section 55 of the Data protection Act 1998. I declare that the information provided will not be used for any purposes unrelated to this enquiry.
I confirm that: I have read and understood the data protection declaration, one of the options stated above applies to me and I agree to the terms of use as stated on this website.
Below are the t's & c's
I am entitled to the insurance information about the vehicle detailed above for one or more of the following reasons: It is either registered/ owned/ insured by me or my employer; I am permitted to drive it; I am an Insurance Broker and acting on behalf of my client.
I understand it is an offence to wrongfully obtain information of this nature without any of the above reasonable causes. If I fail to provide true reasons for acquiring this information I may be committing an offence of unlawfully obtaining data contrary to section 55 of the Data protection Act 1998. I declare that the information provided will not be used for any purposes unrelated to this enquiry.
I confirm that: I have read and understood the data protection declaration, one of the options stated above applies to me and I agree to the terms of use as stated on this website.
jayfish said:
What would stop you, oh maybe owning £150k of desirable metal and being unable to sleep at night because you saved £1k on your insurance costs
you think the difference in costs of insurance between a 1ltr fiesta and a ferrari would only be 1k to most? also if you read my reply again slowly maybe you wont completely miss the point i was trying to make (P.S. not all Ferrari's are 150k my friend)JC2012 said:
If I fail to provide true reasons for acquiring this information I may be committing an offence of unlawfully obtaining data contrary to section 55 of the Data protection Act 1998. I declare that the information provided will not be used for any purposes unrelated to this enquiry.
I'd be surprised if it was against the data protection act - I thought that was the holders responsibility, not the viewer of said data.Is section 55 available online for me to read?
Unlawful obtaining etc. of personal data.
(1)A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller—
(a)obtain or disclose personal data or the information contained in personal data, or
(b)procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.
(2)Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who shows—
(a)that the obtaining, disclosing or procuring—
(i)was necessary for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, or
(ii)was required or authorised by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court,
(b)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he had in law the right to obtain or disclose the data or information or, as the case may be, to procure the disclosure of the information to the other person,
(c)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he would have had the consent of the data controller if the data controller had known of the obtaining, disclosing or procuring and the circumstances of it, or
(d)that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing or procuring was justified as being in the public interest.
(3)A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.
(4)A person who sells personal data is guilty of an offence if he has obtained the data in contravention of subsection (1).
(5)A person who offers to sell personal data is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he has obtained the data in contravention of subsection (1), or
(b)he subsequently obtains the data in contravention of that subsection.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5), an advertisement indicating that personal data are or may be for sale is an offer to sell the data.
(7)Section 1(2) does not apply for the purposes of this section; and for the purposes of subsections (4) to (6), “personal data” includes information extracted from personal data.
(8)References in this section to personal data do not include references to personal data which by virtue of section 28 [F1or 33A] are exempt from this section.
(1)A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller—
(a)obtain or disclose personal data or the information contained in personal data, or
(b)procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.
(2)Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who shows—
(a)that the obtaining, disclosing or procuring—
(i)was necessary for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, or
(ii)was required or authorised by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court,
(b)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he had in law the right to obtain or disclose the data or information or, as the case may be, to procure the disclosure of the information to the other person,
(c)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he would have had the consent of the data controller if the data controller had known of the obtaining, disclosing or procuring and the circumstances of it, or
(d)that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing or procuring was justified as being in the public interest.
(3)A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.
(4)A person who sells personal data is guilty of an offence if he has obtained the data in contravention of subsection (1).
(5)A person who offers to sell personal data is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he has obtained the data in contravention of subsection (1), or
(b)he subsequently obtains the data in contravention of that subsection.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5), an advertisement indicating that personal data are or may be for sale is an offer to sell the data.
(7)Section 1(2) does not apply for the purposes of this section; and for the purposes of subsections (4) to (6), “personal data” includes information extracted from personal data.
(8)References in this section to personal data do not include references to personal data which by virtue of section 28 [F1or 33A] are exempt from this section.
Globs said:
But he already knew the data, as the person told him. Is confirmation still obtaining data?
Also it is clearly in the public interest, if the car is insured or not.
It's in the public interest for me to know if you have a criminal record. Can I go and check out your personal info?Also it is clearly in the public interest, if the car is insured or not.
Globs said:
But he already knew the data, as the person told him. Is confirmation still obtaining data?
Also it is clearly in the public interest, if the car is insured or not.
Personally i would refrain from airing the fact he's checked his neighbours car using specific sites on a forum.Also it is clearly in the public interest, if the car is insured or not.
R1 Loon said:
It's in the public interest for me to know if you have a criminal record. Can I go and check out your personal info?
How have you come to that conclusion? That makes no sense at all. would you care if one of your friends had a criminal record? but i bet you would care if he hits you in his un-insured car. of course its of public interest. what happens if he hit a family car and kills them all? he shouldnt be driving IF he isnt insured end of. R1 Loon said:
It's in the public interest for me to know if you have a criminal record.
Is it? How? I've served my time and am now a reformed character, FFS I don't even carry a gun now.If however I told you I could drive a car without insurance (and did so) what would you like to know?
buster1984 said:
How have you come to that conclusion? That makes no sense at all. would you care if one of your friends had a criminal record? but i bet you would care if he hits you in his un-insured car. of course its of public interest. what happens if he hit a family car and kills them all? he shouldnt be driving IF he isnt insured end of.
How do you know my car's insured? Or any of those around you? Do you check every car you see on the road just in case?My conclusion was drawn from the fact that you decided that knowing someone else's information was "in the public interest" even if the person doing the digging had no legal way of enforcing any wrongdoing he found.
VeeFour said:
Kinky said:
- the car is insured by the owner and is being driven in the UK
Again, worth checking the small print. It's all well and good to have "Driving Other Cars: Yes" on the certificate (which mine does) ......
R1 Loon said:
How do you know my car's insured? Or any of those around you? Do you check every car you see on the road just in case?
My conclusion was drawn from the fact that you decided that knowing someone else's information was "in the public interest" even if the person doing the digging had no legal way of enforcing any wrongdoing he found.
yeah ok fair point if he ilegally abtained the info then fair enough. but if he was to grass then you wouldnt tell the rozzers how you came about finding out would you? its just like those people who phone up and grass on benefit thiefs. its just a tip off and then the authorities do the rest. im not condoning the telling of tails though but still i bloody hate those uninsured drivers!!My conclusion was drawn from the fact that you decided that knowing someone else's information was "in the public interest" even if the person doing the digging had no legal way of enforcing any wrongdoing he found.
LBFB said:
Just cut to the chase and save yourself a lot of time and grief; go out tonight and smash all the windows and slash the tyres.
If it's insured, they won't be too worried as they will be able to claim.
If it's not, then you've just proved your point and taught them a valuable lesson.
If it's insured, they won't be too worried as they will be able to claim.
If it's not, then you've just proved your point and taught them a valuable lesson.
buster1984 said:
yeah ok fair point if he ilegally abtained the info then fair enough. but if he was to grass then you wouldnt tell the rozzers how you came about finding out would you? its just like those people who phone up and grass on benefit thiefs. its just a tip off and then the authorities do the rest. im not condoning the telling of tails though but still i bloody hate those uninsured drivers!!
I'm certainly never going to defend uninsured driving, it's just that some people have erroneous views of what constitutes being uninsured.Globs said:
Is it? How? I've served my time and am now a reformed character, FFS I don't even carry a gun now.
If however I told you I could drive a car without insurance (and did so) what would you like to know?
Glad to know you don't carry a gun anymore.. Is it knives now If however I told you I could drive a car without insurance (and did so) what would you like to know?
How about your name, address and car registration number please.
R1 Loon said:
How about your name, address and car registration number please.
Congrats on trying to re-frame the thread to the DPA and privacy concerns, it's often a good technique.However, back on topic,
Whether a car is insured or not is something the police have been detecting with ANPR for years now, regardless of just cause. HPI checks may also cover similar ground.
The OP suspects the car is being driven while uninsured and that therefore a crime is being committed. This suspicion comes from the owner telling him. Using the database to look this up is not a crime under the DPA, neither is it a crime for the DVLA to make this available to him.
You yourself have listed various reasons why this is not under the DPA, even if you yourself think it is.
tercelgold said:
Come June 2011 I think it has to be either insured or SORN so I'd probably leave it until he gets a letter.
"The offence of keeping a vehicle with no insurance came into force on 4 February 2011 commenced by the Road Safety Act 2006 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2011."It seems it's not going to enforced until June though - don't know why the delay.
http://www.mib.org.uk/Motor+Insurance+Database/en/...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff