Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

FightBack Forums _ The Flame Pit _ Scam Tow Company Purposely Fails To Update TRACE - Legal Ramifications?

Posted by: waterkeys Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 07:04
Post #1450427

Hello, it may at first seem I've posted this in the wrong area, but bare with me here. Extremely strange set of circumstances have unfolded in the last few days.

I live in a new-ish built area and the whole land is privately owned Including all the car spaces. The streets all have "private road" written on them on the entrance, and is miles away from civilization.

6 months ago I purchased a vehicle from an auction, turned out it had no log book so I couldn't tax until I received my own copy. Oh well, not to bother, I parked it up (on private land) and didn't think twice about it. 3 days later.... It was gone! Shocked, I phoned the police and told them of the situation, they checked on TRACE and nothing came back so they proceeded to file a stolen vehicle report. I never heard anything back. I even phoned up a few weeks later out of curiosity, but to no avail.

As I drive a company van, I tend to not need a personal car however the need arose, so fast forward to last week, I went back to the same auction and purchased myself ANOTHER car. The car was out of M.O.T so needed to be checked and a few repairs made, so once again, parked it on 'private land' booked in an M.O.T and ONCE AGAIN the car was GONE!!

I immediately phoned the police and the first thing they did was check TRACE, nothing came back so they filled in a stolen vehicle report. At this point I am fuming that this could have happened twice in a row!

The next day I spoke with the neighbours who said they saw a branded company arrive and leave within minutes, no warnings, so signs on the windscreen, nothing. The arrived, lifted it and disappeared. So I phoned the police back to give the information to them and the first thing they said was "that's a company we/council/DVLA use to remove vehicles" Confused I asked for an explanation, they said "does the car have any parking tickets, no tax, etc" I said I had just purchased the car and not sure however it is out of tax, and needs an M.O.T for which I booked in.

First thing they did was check TRACE, guess what? NOTHING! No record on TRACE what so ever.

They then gave me the number to this alleged company that apparently lifted the vehicle and it would ring a few times and go to some mobile voicemail. I tried for hours but with no joy, this is already sounding fishy! Their impound was over 30 miles away so I thought out of a spot of luck I'd go there and see what happens. I went, and low and behold, THERE'S MY CAR!

I'm now arguing with the scummy clerks and demanded they tell me on what grounds they removed my car and who assigned them to take my vehicle. They said "vehicle not taxed - so we took it - probably the DVLA." I'm fuming at them yet all they could say is "the police know we have it, we tell them before we take any cars." So RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM I phoned the police 101 number, gave the crime reference, and on loud speaker, the police said "we don't have a record of this vehicle on our systems or on TRACE." All the dodgy clerks did was smirk and shrug their shoulders and say it's not their problem. 'Pay up or sod off.'

I'm raging at this point so I phoned that dodgy number the police gave me for this company, and guess what? Its a mobile phone that's ringing on the desk right in front of them and they just DECLINED THE CALL! IN FRONT OF MY EYES! I had no choice but to pay up and get my vehicle back. I am sickened at this point but there was nothing I could do as my hands where tied.

Now here is the INTERESTING PART. Just before I left I asked for them to check if they by any chance (out of blind luck mind you) taken another car, my first auction car, I had purchased 6 months ago? AND YOU'D NEVER BLOODY GUESS WHAT!! IT WAS THEM! ITS NOW SITTING ON A HEAP IN THE YARD OPPOSITE BEING STRIPPED FOR PARTS!! BangHead.gif angryfire.gif angry9.gif angry7.gif angry6.gif angry5.gif angry4.gif angry5.gif

I IMMEDIATELY PHONED THE POLICE to inform them about this and once again, IT WAS NOT REPORTED TO TRACE NOR THE POLICE! All the police could say was I had to find the authority that ordered the removal. Before I ended up doing damage to something or something, I left that place in fear I was going to loose my marbles!

When my first car was stolen (sorry I mean 'recovered') I ran into a guy who had his BMW stolen when he was away over the summer holidays, he had it SORN'd before leaving, he reported it to the police and heard nothing back.

So to recap.

1) Vehicles were both on private land (shared use, not owned by me) How does this relate to non-taxed vehicles?
2) No signage regarding non-taxed vehicles, simply a sign that vehicles who do not display a permit will be ticketed. (private parking firm who never attend.)
3) No clamp on vehicle, no removal notice on windscreen from DVLA, nothing!
4) Both cars reported stolen, and no police records where updated with removal. Even after six whole months of passing.
4) Failure to update TRACE. (This MUST be illegal - waste of police time otherwise??)

There is obviously something extremely fishy or better yet an outright SCAM with this specific outfit is running. What are the legal ramifications in failing to update TRACE? Who do I contact to make an official complaint/seek compensation for the loss of my vehicles? Essentially, they fail to update TRACE on purpose, car is not recovered within 28 days, they then strip for parts ££££. Vehicle is never heard of again. This is outright fraud or worse yet THEFT.

Any advice thrown my way is a start for me, I'm going to ask around and find out all of the vehicles that have gone missing over the years from this area and bring this to some official to look into. This is beyond absurd. Something must be done to stop this. This must be illegal some how, and they have to be held accountable.

thank you

Posted by: hcandersen Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 07:55
Post #1450433

I'm going to ask around and find out all of the vehicles that have gone missing over the years from this area and bring this to some official to look into. This is beyond absurd. Something must be done to stop this. This must be illegal some how, and they have to be held accountable.

I suggest you use your time more wisely and put the correct party in your crosshairs.
On whose instructions were the vehicles removed?
If DVLA, then get back to THEM, find out the reason for removal.

https://www.gov.uk/get-a-clamped-or-impounded-vehicle-released

If them, you would initiate a complaint with them. IMO, anything else would be a waste of time. If the removal company are the agents of DVLA, then I cannot see that you would have a cause of action against them.

This needs to be moved to Private Parking and Clamping/Removal

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 08:23
Post #1450437

AS HCA says, the target should be the principles who employ the removal firm, always deal with the organ grinder, not the monkey.
However you seem to have no clue as to who that may be, assuming it is the DVLA may well leave you chasing the wrong party.

What are the police doing about it?
Are they also assuming that this was a lawful removal or what?
What paperwork, if any, did you get when you recovered the vehicle?


Posted by: Incandescent Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 09:59
Post #1450458

Using a mobile phone, you can find out if a vehicle has VED or not at the side of the road. If DVLA/Police/Council didn't order the removal, it could be a nice little earner has been discovered by this tow company.

Posted by: peterguk Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 10:05
Post #1450461

QUOTE (waterkeys @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 07:04) *
Vehicles were both on private land (shared use, not owned by me) How does this relate to non-taxed vehicles?


Who owns the land is not the question in terms of untaxed vehicles.

Let's see a GSV. Was the "private land" behind locked gates?

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 10:07
Post #1450462

QUOTE (Incandescent @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 09:59) *
Using a mobile phone, you can find out if a vehicle has VED or not at the side of the road. If DVLA/Police/Council didn't order the removal, it could be a nice little earner has been discovered by this tow company.



Nice little earner???
At best if this is a lawful removal it is negligent not to follow procedures and inform TRACE.
At worst, the removal is not lawful and that is theft.

Posted by: Korting Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 10:44
Post #1450470

I would contact your MP. The fact that they hadn't informed TRACE means IMO that they intended to permanently deprive the owner of said vehicle. It doesn't look like negligence, to me its out and out theft & fraud.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:07
Post #1450477

I agree
1/ If the tow was lawful there still seems an intent to permanently deprive the owner of their car by not supplying the information to TRACE.
2/ If it's private land then there are a number of factors that mean the tow may not be lawful.
a/ It may not be lawful for the DVLA (/a contractor on behalf of) to tow anyway, but DVLA usually clamp first, DVLA will be able to tell you if the tow was known to them (which would suggest even if they pretended they had DVLA authority they were misusing it
b/ If it was towed on behalf of the landholder its a clear breach of PoFA.

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:42
Post #1450487

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:07) *
I agree
1/ If the tow was lawful there still seems an intent to permanently deprive the owner of their car by not supplying the information to TRACE.
………….

My only concern with that is proving it. The easy defence is "We forgot in this instance"
If OP is correct and can substantiate a history of removals without TRACE being informed, that would build a case and quite possibly see criminal charges.
I would not fancy being a company director if this is normal company practice.


Whatever reason for the removal, there should be a paperwork trail.
Contact to owner requesting storage and removal fees, warning that vehicle will be disposed of etc etc.
None of that with the first vehicle??

Posted by: cabbyman Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:50
Post #1450492

I wonder if the auctioneers are complicit here? On both occasions, the vehicles appear to have been removed within 3 days of being sold by the same auctioneers. It seems a bit fast for DVLA to have acted as a result of the V5 changes.

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:55
Post #1450495

QUOTE (cabbyman @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:50) *
I wonder if the auctioneers are complicit here? On both occasions, the vehicles appear to have been removed within 3 days of being sold by the same auctioneers. It seems a bit fast for DVLA to have acted as a result of the V5 changes.


Presumably the other BMW mentioned was not connected with the auctioneers ?

If V5 changes had gone through, I would question DVLA acting so fast.
But if not, vehicle could seem to have been an untaxed, unsorned, whatever, from previous owner.
And possibly for some time or a repeat offender.
Which can justify an immediate lift.

Posted by: mickR Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 12:19
Post #1450507

QUOTE (cabbyman @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:50) *
I wonder if the auctioneers are complicit here? On both occasions, the vehicles appear to have been removed within 3 days of being sold by the same auctioneers. It seems a bit fast for DVLA to have acted as a result of the V5 changes.


I agree very strange.

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 11:55) *
Presumably the other BMW mentioned was not connected with the auctioneers ?

If V5 changes had gone through, I would question DVLA acting so fast.
But if not, vehicle could seem to have been an untaxed, unsorned, whatever, from previous owner.
And possibly for some time or a repeat offender.
Which can justify an immediate lift.


On both vehicles ? That would be one he'll of a coincidence.

Posted by: Longtime Lurker Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 14:10
Post #1450545

An anonymous tip off to CrimeStoppers might be good way to get this properly investigated. Explain the scam in detail and action ought to be taken.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 15:05
Post #1450565

I wonder if it’s more likely to be a nosey Parker neighbour or the estate developer than the auction house.

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 15:46
Post #1450573

Or if it is DVLA related simply that the tow company know that there is confusion between private road and public highway so know they may find rich pickings in untaxed or SORN vehicles parked up on "private"

Posted by: freddy1 Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 15:54
Post #1450574

its upto tow company to show authorisation from DVLA/counsil , not you to disprove it

if they cannot show the correct paperwork , then the removal of both cars was simple theft , all very well saying "sorry" there,s your car back , however they may have trouble doing that with the first car

if insurance paid out on first car , inform them that its now been located , they will not be amused and will want pennies from tow co

Posted by: Redivi Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 20:23
Post #1450664

Members might remember the Midway Car Parks scandal of several years ago

One feature was that cars were towed to a disreputable garage
If the car was particularly attractive, it would apply to the DVLA to transfer the registered keeper to itself

The DVLA would agree to the request, over-ruling the owner's protests for the reason that he was by definition no longer the keeper of the vehicle

It would have to be a car he was willing to lose but, if a motorist that was the victim of this scam SORNED the car then informed the DVLA that the company was the new keeper, who would be liable for the failure to insure and tax it ?

Posted by: notmeatloaf Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 23:55
Post #1450745

If the company is a limited company then why not get their accounts and see if you recognise a name or if they do a lot of DVLA work.

If neither then let HMRC know, they will do far more than the police.

Posted by: Redivi Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 01:54
Post #1450758

If you use the Companies House Beta Service, copies of accounts are free

Posted by: cp8759 Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 13:38
Post #1450864

Did they give you any paperwork when you paid to get the car back? If they were legitimately acting for a public authority, they will have issued some sort of paperwork. If they were acting under their own authority, you can prosecute the company under POFA s 54.

Posted by: Sparxy Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 00:10
Post #1451046

For the experts: Could OP gain his own evidence (photos of previous car being broken, VIN/Reg plates, etc), confirmation from TRACE that no details passed for both cars, etc, and then persue a civil claim against the towing company for breach of PoFA anyway? My thought process is that the company may provide the details of who instructed them in defence (if another agency did) - so even if not successful against the towing company, OP may come away with some useful information for then claiming against the correct party if unable to do so any other way.

Posted by: Neil B Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 12:02
Post #1451161

Why is everyone talking to themselves?

OP has never been back.

Posted by: Fredd Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 13:41
Post #1451216

QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 12:02) *
OP has never been back.

"Never" is a bit hyperbolic when it's actually just "since Saturday".

Posted by: Sparxy Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 14:56
Post #1451243

QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 12:02) *
Why is everyone talking to themselves?

OP has never been back.


Because it's sometimes good to have a discussion on a subject, in case said event happens again? biggrin.gif

Posted by: cp8759 Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 01:05
Post #1451519

QUOTE (Sparxy @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 00:10) *
For the experts: Could OP gain his own evidence (photos of previous car being broken, VIN/Reg plates, etc), confirmation from TRACE that no details passed for both cars, etc, and then persue a civil claim against the towing company for breach of PoFA anyway? My thought process is that the company may provide the details of who instructed them in defence (if another agency did) - so even if not successful against the towing company, OP may come away with some useful information for then claiming against the correct party if unable to do so any other way.

You can't pursue a civil claim for a breach of the criminal law. However the OP could pursue a criminal case against the company, if he had sufficient evidence (nowhere does it say that only the police or the CPS can file criminal charges under PoFA s 54). He could also quite separately pursue a civil claim for tortious interference with goods.

Posted by: Neil B Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 14:43
Post #1451682

QUOTE (Sparxy @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 14:56) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 12:02) *
Why is everyone talking to themselves?

OP has never been back.


Because it's sometimes good to have a discussion on a subject, in case said event happens again? biggrin.gif

It is indeed.
But it does make me wonder when we have untaxed cars parked on, possibly, the highway, almost unbelievable failures of the authorities,
no knowledge of who removed vehicles or why, etc.

Posted by: Sparxy Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 19:24
Post #1451798

QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 14:43) *
But it does make me wonder when we have untaxed cars parked on, possibly, the highway, almost unbelievable failures of the authorities,
no knowledge of who removed vehicles or why, etc.


I wish the local authority could rid a car from our (unfortunately private land) car park. It's been sat there almost 5 years at least. It is sorned. It's an early 00's reg and in a poor state.

The supposed owner of said car has allegedly previously said that they are "reserving their parking space", but they have another car they use, which they park on the road.

Have been sorely tempted at times to leave some signs advising that it'll be re-registered and disposed of, and any (unlikely) money given to charity, and then if no response just re-register and dispose of anyway.

Posted by: cp8759 Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 02:08
Post #1451930

QUOTE (Sparxy @ Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 19:24) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Tue, 15 Jan 2019 - 14:43) *
But it does make me wonder when we have untaxed cars parked on, possibly, the highway, almost unbelievable failures of the authorities,
no knowledge of who removed vehicles or why, etc.


I wish the local authority could rid a car from our (unfortunately private land) car park. It's been sat there almost 5 years at least. It is sorned. It's an early 00's reg and in a poor state.

The supposed owner of said car has allegedly previously said that they are "reserving their parking space", but they have another car they use, which they park on the road.

Have been sorely tempted at times to leave some signs advising that it'll be re-registered and disposed of, and any (unlikely) money given to charity, and then if no response just re-register and dispose of anyway.

Is the car park accessible (even if only on foot) by the general public? If so, the car needs insurance, even if it's SORNed.

Posted by: Korting Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 19:54
Post #1452259

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 02:08) *
Is the car park accessible (even if only on foot) by the general public? If so, the car needs insurance, even if it's SORNed.


Does that apply if a car is parked and sorned on your private front drive?

Posted by: cp8759 Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 17:38
Post #1452941

QUOTE (Korting @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 19:54) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 02:08) *
Is the car park accessible (even if only on foot) by the general public? If so, the car needs insurance, even if it's SORNed.


Does that apply if a car is parked and sorned on your private front drive?

Arguably the same applies as long as there is implied consent for access up to the front door and members of the public can walk past the car. Anyone can come to your front door to deliver something through the letterbox, equally and of your neighbours could come and knock on your door to have a moan about the local council, invite you over for a cup of tea, moan about the weather or whatever else. You could be anti social and tell them to get lost, but up to the point where you tell them to go away they are not trespassing (and they are still not trespassing providing they leave your land without delay).

So you could argue your drive is accessible to the public and if somebody were, for example, to cut themselves on a sharp edge of your car, they would be entitled to claim off your policy (if you have one). Thus if the car doesn't have insurance and it's sitting on a drive, and assuming you don't have fancy gates blocking access, then it may well be an offence to keep the car there without insurance.

You could of course revoke the implied consent by posting appropriate signs at the entrance to the drive, I believe whether signs are sufficient on their own or whether you need a physical barrier of some sort has been subject of some debate.

Posted by: DancingDad Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 17:58
Post #1452954

That's stretching it a bit CP.
RTA 1988 says a person may not use a vehicle on a road or other public place unless it is insured to at least minimum requirements.
I'm not certain that implied consent for access makes my drive a public place in the first place and damn certain that if my car is parked on my drive, I am not using it.
In that respect, with the caveat of continuous insurance requirement applying if the vehicle not SORN, the law does not require insurance.
I accept public liability may apply is the car was parked in a dangerous position or condition and someone (postie for instance) injured themselves as a result but that is a risk that I am not legally required to cover with mandatory insurance.

Posted by: cp8759 Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:10
Post #1452961

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 17:58) *
That's stretching it a bit CP.
RTA 1988 says a person may not use a vehicle on a road or other public place unless it is insured to at least minimum requirements.
I'm not certain that implied consent for access makes my drive a public place in the first place and damn certain that if my car is parked on my drive, I am not using it.
In that respect, with the caveat of continuous insurance requirement applying if the vehicle not SORN, the law does not require insurance.
I accept public liability may apply is the car was parked in a dangerous position or condition and someone (postie for instance) injured themselves as a result but that is a risk that I am not legally required to cover with mandatory insurance.

I didn't say it was 100% the case, I just said it is arguable. As I can't really see the police prosecuting someone in these circumstances, I doubt it will ever come up for judicial determination. That being said, if Brexit is cancelled and the VNUK judgment is implemented in UK law, we may need to insure SORNed cars anyway.

Posted by: nigelbb Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:47
Post #1452990

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:38) *
QUOTE (Korting @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 19:54) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 02:08) *
Is the car park accessible (even if only on foot) by the general public? If so, the car needs insurance, even if it's SORNed.


Does that apply if a car is parked and sorned on your private front drive?

Arguably the same applies as long as there is implied consent for access up to the front door and members of the public can walk past the car. Anyone can come to your front door to deliver something through the letterbox, equally and of your neighbours could come and knock on your door to have a moan about the local council, invite you over for a cup of tea, moan about the weather or whatever else. You could be anti social and tell them to get lost, but up to the point where you tell them to go away they are not trespassing (and they are still not trespassing providing they leave your land without delay).

So you could argue your drive is accessible to the public and if somebody were, for example, to cut themselves on a sharp edge of your car, they would be entitled to claim off your policy (if you have one). Thus if the car doesn't have insurance and it's sitting on a drive, and assuming you don't have fancy gates blocking access, then it may well be an offence to keep the car there without insurance.

You could of course revoke the implied consent by posting appropriate signs at the entrance to the drive, I believe whether signs are sufficient on their own or whether you need a physical barrier of some sort has been subject of some debate.

What about keeping an uninsured bicycle or lawnmower in the drive that the uninvited visitor could equally well gash themselves on?

Posted by: cp8759 Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 19:01
Post #1452992

QUOTE (nigelbb @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:47) *
What about keeping an uninsured bicycle or lawnmower in the drive that the uninvited visitor could equally well gash themselves on?

A bicycle does not need insurance on the road so that's irrelevant. As for a lawnmower, RTA s 143 only applies to motor vehicles.

“motor vehicle” means, subject to section 20 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 (which makes special provision about invalid carriages, within the meaning of that Act), a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads

So it would be a question of fact for the court whether the mower in question is a "mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads". A ride-on mower registered with DVLA and with a number plate would need insurance, a plug-in electric mower you have to push along would not.

Posted by: DancingDad Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 20:50
Post #1453002

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:10) *
….That being said, if Brexit is cancelled and the VNUK judgment is implemented in UK law, we may need to insure SORNed cars anyway.
There's a bit of difference between the family banger parked up, SORN on a private driveway and a tractor in use on farmland.

Surely within UK that sort of accident would have been covered under Employer or Public Liability Insurance anyway?


Posted by: localdriver Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 21:30
Post #1453013

QUOTE (Korting @ Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 19:54) *
[quote Does that apply if a car is parked and sorned on your private front drive?


It depends, if the public have access - the authority to access - it may be considered to be a public place and insurance would be required.

Just because the public can access - but don't have the authority to access - it may not be considered to be a public place.

Posted by: cp8759 Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 21:57
Post #1453024

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 20:50) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:10) *
….That being said, if Brexit is cancelled and the VNUK judgment is implemented in UK law, we may need to insure SORNed cars anyway.
There's a bit of difference between the family banger parked up, SORN on a private driveway and a tractor in use on farmland.

Surely within UK that sort of accident would have been covered under Employer or Public Liability Insurance anyway?

You're right, in the UK the issue would not arise as other insurance policies would be in force, but the ECJ decided in VNUK that the issue of public access is irrelevant. Taken literally, it requires Lewis Hamilton to have insurance to drive during a race, see https://www.motorsportuk.org/assets/msavnukjan2017.pdf

Admittedly, the European Commission has recognised this law is nuts and they're looking to change the directive. If we actually leave the EU in 70 days this will no longer concern us.

Posted by: nigelbb Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 08:20
Post #1453085

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 20:01) *
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 18:47) *
What about keeping an uninsured bicycle or lawnmower in the drive that the uninvited visitor could equally well gash themselves on?

A bicycle does not need insurance on the road so that's irrelevant. As for a lawnmower, RTA s 143 only applies to motor vehicles.

“motor vehicle” means, subject to section 20 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 (which makes special provision about invalid carriages, within the meaning of that Act), a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads

So it would be a question of fact for the court whether the mower in question is a "mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads". A ride-on mower registered with DVLA and with a number plate would need insurance, a plug-in electric mower you have to push along would not.

My point was not about insurance but that the same liability for 3rd party injuries applies whether it's a car or bicycle or any other object in the drive.

Posted by: cp8759 Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:23
Post #1453148

QUOTE (nigelbb @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 08:20) *
My point was not about insurance but that the same liability for 3rd party injuries applies whether it's a car or bicycle or any other object in the drive.

Ah right, well if a dangerous object was left negligently were it was reasonably foreseeable that injury might occur, there may well be a liability to the injured 3rd party. Generally if the object is not a motor vehicle your home insurance will cover such eventualities, but of course if the occupier doesn't have insurance the liability would be theirs alone.

My point was that at least in principle, a SORN car on your drive needs RTA compliant insurance, though in practice I don't see plod wanting to do anything about it.

Posted by: Korting Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:31
Post #1453153

The difference between the VNUK case is that the tractor was being used whereas a car parked up and SORNED would not be in use.

Other insurance policies only come into play if there ones, but public liability and/or house/buildings insurance is not compulsory, so you could have a situation where the vehicle is not covered by any policy.

Here's another scenario which could have turned into an accident:

A burglar was being chased by police and came across the rear of my drive which is gated off and there is no public access unless invited, now had I been reversing a sorned an uninsured car and hit him, would I have been guilty of any offence?

Posted by: cp8759 Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:39
Post #1453161

QUOTE (Korting @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:31) *
A burglar was being chased by police and came across the rear of my drive which is gated off and there is no public access unless invited, now had I been reversing a sorned an uninsured car and hit him, would I have been guilty of any offence?

Of course not, you would just say you were assisting the police in effecting an arrest biggrin.gif

Posted by: DancingDad Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:40
Post #1453162

QUOTE (Korting @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:31) *
.........A burglar was being chased by police and came across the rear of my drive which is gated off and there is no public access unless invited, now had I been reversing a sorned an uninsured car and hit him, would I have been guilty of any offence?



Not as far as insurance is concerned.
Possible negligence or even assault charges but they would be dependent on circumstance.

Posted by: localdriver Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:44
Post #1453166

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 12:23) *
My point was that at least in principle, a SORN car on your drive needs RTA compliant insurance


Only if the private drive is considered to be a 'Public Place' within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act.


Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)