RE: New law means insure it or pay the penalty
Thursday 29th June 2006
It must be insuredIf you keep a vehicle then it will have to be insured, whether or not it's on the road. That's the implication of a news story today in the insurance industry's magazine Insurance Times.
Insurance to be mandatory?
New law means insure it or pay the penalty
It must be insured
The Motor Insurer's Bureau (MIB) said it had "successfully lobbied the Government to introduce a new law which will require all vehicles to have insurance". This will be in the Road Safety Bill, currently going through Parliament and will create a new offence of "keeping a vehicle without insurance".
The insurance industry -- which of course will stand to profit hugely from this -- reckons that it tightens up the law against those using a vehicle on the road without insurance.
The move came after the MIB started sending details of suspected uninsured cars to police forces up and down the country, which allegedly resulted in a 10x increase in arrests by police.
The MIB argues that the £30 extra it costs all of us to cover those who drive without insurance could be cut if this becomes law. Well, we'll wait and see -- prices tend to go up rather than down -- but if you've a vehicle or two off the road, they'll now need totally superfluous insurance.
Great move, Tony.
Picture courtesy of the Eastbourne & District Mini Club
Discussion
In Norway insurance is mandatory, as you won't get to register a car if it is not insured. However, if the car is not registered (and therefore not legal on the road) then you won't have to insure it either.
The story does not provide enough information to show me if this system is the intention of the law change.
The story does not provide enough information to show me if this system is the intention of the law change.
So how can this work for me - I have stripped and largely disposed of a car bought as a donor for a self build car, but still have the V5 as this is needed as proff so i can get an age related plate when eventually I finish building something that at present is a collection of bits and sticks of metal I am gradually welding together. I have to insure something that doesn't even exist - hopefully the premium should reflect this, but somehow I doubt it......
The insurance industry is your friend...
Bollox it is....
I've always respected a contract of insurance. If the robbing parasites get this into law, I will take a very different view. You rip me off, I'll rip you off.
I have two cars off the road, and I'm buggered if I'm going to insure them because the police can't do their jobs effectively.
ANPR cameras are appearing on street lamps everywhere; they know where the uninsureds are...so why do they need this?
If a car's not registered to anybody and has no keeper's address, how is this law going to have any effect...?
Write to your MP, folks. It might not affect you now, but you might need to keep a car off the road in future...
Go on, get on with it....
Bollox it is....
I've always respected a contract of insurance. If the robbing parasites get this into law, I will take a very different view. You rip me off, I'll rip you off.
I have two cars off the road, and I'm buggered if I'm going to insure them because the police can't do their jobs effectively.
ANPR cameras are appearing on street lamps everywhere; they know where the uninsureds are...so why do they need this?
If a car's not registered to anybody and has no keeper's address, how is this law going to have any effect...?
Write to your MP, folks. It might not affect you now, but you might need to keep a car off the road in future...
Go on, get on with it....
so what exactly do they expect the third party risks to be for a car that stowed away? driving history would be irrelevant...
the whole thing smacks of profiteering. the only insurance of interest to most owners is fire and theft under these circumstances - this i can understand and appreciate. specialist policies for this purpose must already exist though - I just hav eno idea what the premiums are like.
surely it is, under such a regime, much more sensible to stick with the driver being insured and not the car.
the whole thing smacks of profiteering. the only insurance of interest to most owners is fire and theft under these circumstances - this i can understand and appreciate. specialist policies for this purpose must already exist though - I just hav eno idea what the premiums are like.
surely it is, under such a regime, much more sensible to stick with the driver being insured and not the car.
As I just mentioned in another thread, our policymakers are holding a few too many conversations like the following:
"People are not paying for things they should be."
"We can solve the problem, though. Let's make the people who do pay subsidise the ones who don't!"
Hopefully, all they're trying to do is crack down on the situation where someone insures a cheap, small car on a fully comprehensive policy and uses it as third party cover for a much higher-risk vehicle, which I've seen go on.
Hopefully.
Anyway, I thought it was safe to drive an uninsured vehicle with no tax or MOT, as long as you did it below the speed limit?
"People are not paying for things they should be."
"We can solve the problem, though. Let's make the people who do pay subsidise the ones who don't!"
Hopefully, all they're trying to do is crack down on the situation where someone insures a cheap, small car on a fully comprehensive policy and uses it as third party cover for a much higher-risk vehicle, which I've seen go on.
Hopefully.
Anyway, I thought it was safe to drive an uninsured vehicle with no tax or MOT, as long as you did it below the speed limit?
lafr said:
I am sure that i am goint to get shot down for this, but i think it is a good idea! As are the computerised records of MOT and TAX. I do hope, hovever, that insurance company introduce a sensible level of cover for cars declared SORN.
LAFR
LAFR
[Corporal Jones voice] Permission to fire the first shot sir! [/Corporal Jones voice]
How will this stop the scrotes from stealing the id of another motor? It already happens now, with drivers of JCB's getting tickets for doing 90mph (as if!) through scamreas. I can only see this sort of policy increasing this issue.
Insurance isn't compulsory at all in South Australia. When you register the car the goverment takes a out a sort of group policy on everyone so if your car is registered then you are covered for third party personal injury.
So for example I buy a six cylinder car and register it for 3 months for £80 and that's all I need to do to have a car legally on the road, all road tax and insurance crap is included in the one payment none of this monkey business you have in the UK. There are not MOT checks either because they are considered too susceptible to corruption, the police instead just have random tests where they set up mobile testing stations and test various cars picked at random.
So for example I buy a six cylinder car and register it for 3 months for £80 and that's all I need to do to have a car legally on the road, all road tax and insurance crap is included in the one payment none of this monkey business you have in the UK. There are not MOT checks either because they are considered too susceptible to corruption, the police instead just have random tests where they set up mobile testing stations and test various cars picked at random.
This won't help at all. People who don't register their cars (the problem) won't get caught. Those who abide by the law (not the problem) will pay more. This new Road Bill has already got some ridiculous new rules for cyclists and if this gets added it will be another layer of persecution of the law abiding majority.
F***ing stinks.
F***ing stinks.
So the MIB argue it'll save us all £30 a year in not having to pay for uninsured accidents?
Well, 'Sherlock', how much is it going to cost people who have to insure cars that are off the road? More than that £30, I'd say.
Typical "We're not making enough profit, let's put the spin machine into use" actions from the insurance industry.
Well, 'Sherlock', how much is it going to cost people who have to insure cars that are off the road? More than that £30, I'd say.
Typical "We're not making enough profit, let's put the spin machine into use" actions from the insurance industry.
It really depends on the level of insurance they are talking about. If cars kept off the public highway only have to have laid up cover then I'm fine with that. If it requires full Third Party cover then its profiteering by the insurance companies as the level of cover is way above what's needed!
Laid up cover is peanuts and IMHO worth taking out if you have a car sitting in the garage, I've had two cars covered like this in the past whilst they are being restored. If the garage burnt down the car is not covered on your household policy so not only have you lost the garage and car, you won't get a payout for the car from home insurer.
Mark
Laid up cover is peanuts and IMHO worth taking out if you have a car sitting in the garage, I've had two cars covered like this in the past whilst they are being restored. If the garage burnt down the car is not covered on your household policy so not only have you lost the garage and car, you won't get a payout for the car from home insurer.
Mark
Few searches later - round the houses internet style
Looks to me like the original press release has been slightly miss-quoted
From a press release from MIIC (Subsidary of MIB) Dated 30th September 2005
New crackdown on uninsured drivers
There will soon be no escape for persistent uninsured drivers following the government’s amendments to the Road Safety Bill, according to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau.
The new proposals will make it an offence to own a car that is uninsured or not registered as off the road If caught, drivers could pay a £60 fine or see their vehicles seized and crushed.
The MIB will supply the police with details of suspected uninsured vehicles from its database, which contains information covering current and lapsed insurance policies in the UK.
The MIB’s chief executive, Ashton West, commented: “The net is closing ever tighter on uninsured drivers who continually cheat the system. We will help police forces across the country to identify and prosecute these rogue motorists.”
Mr West also believes that targeting uninsured drivers will improve Britain’s road safety record.
“Uninsured drivers are six times more likely to have been convicted of driving unroadworthy vehicles than honest motorists and nine times more likely to have been convicted of drink-driving,” he continued. “In addition, it’s highly likely that their vehicles have no MOTs are untaxed and are generally unroadworthy. By cracking down on these drivers, we should also make our roads safer for everyone else to use.”
If you require more information or would like to speak with Ashton West, please contact:
Neil Cameron – tel: 020 7861 2497
ncameron@qbo-bellpottinger.co.uk
Ric Shadforth – tel: 020 7861 2505
rshadforth@qbo-bellpottinger.co.uk
I've left the email addresses undoctored so the Bots can pick em up and spam em ;D
So from what I can see if the car is not registered as off the road (SORN) then you are fair game to be fined for not being insured if the proposals are accepted but if the car is SORN'd then you have done enough to comply with the new proposed legislation
But I'll be watching carefully it's progress
Looks to me like the original press release has been slightly miss-quoted
From a press release from MIIC (Subsidary of MIB) Dated 30th September 2005
New crackdown on uninsured drivers
There will soon be no escape for persistent uninsured drivers following the government’s amendments to the Road Safety Bill, according to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau.
The new proposals will make it an offence to own a car that is uninsured or not registered as off the road If caught, drivers could pay a £60 fine or see their vehicles seized and crushed.
The MIB will supply the police with details of suspected uninsured vehicles from its database, which contains information covering current and lapsed insurance policies in the UK.
The MIB’s chief executive, Ashton West, commented: “The net is closing ever tighter on uninsured drivers who continually cheat the system. We will help police forces across the country to identify and prosecute these rogue motorists.”
Mr West also believes that targeting uninsured drivers will improve Britain’s road safety record.
“Uninsured drivers are six times more likely to have been convicted of driving unroadworthy vehicles than honest motorists and nine times more likely to have been convicted of drink-driving,” he continued. “In addition, it’s highly likely that their vehicles have no MOTs are untaxed and are generally unroadworthy. By cracking down on these drivers, we should also make our roads safer for everyone else to use.”
If you require more information or would like to speak with Ashton West, please contact:
Neil Cameron – tel: 020 7861 2497
ncameron@qbo-bellpottinger.co.uk
Ric Shadforth – tel: 020 7861 2505
rshadforth@qbo-bellpottinger.co.uk
I've left the email addresses undoctored so the Bots can pick em up and spam em ;D
So from what I can see if the car is not registered as off the road (SORN) then you are fair game to be fined for not being insured if the proposals are accepted but if the car is SORN'd then you have done enough to comply with the new proposed legislation
But I'll be watching carefully it's progress
Edited by B'stard Child on Thursday 29th June 14:19
This has got to be one of the most foolish decisions ever.
And this is from an Insurance Broker!
We all know people who have cars and bikes that are permanently laid up, the idea of having to buy compulsory third party insurance for a car that never leaves the garage is just crazy. Exemptions for Museums or collectors who insure on a traders policy - I doubt it.
Why not follow the system adopted by a number of countries and have an insurance disc in the window of every car for inspection by police and wardens showing make, model, reg number and the Insured.
And this is from an Insurance Broker!
We all know people who have cars and bikes that are permanently laid up, the idea of having to buy compulsory third party insurance for a car that never leaves the garage is just crazy. Exemptions for Museums or collectors who insure on a traders policy - I doubt it.
Why not follow the system adopted by a number of countries and have an insurance disc in the window of every car for inspection by police and wardens showing make, model, reg number and the Insured.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff