All cars must be insured!, Anybody got a link to the full plan |
All cars must be insured!, Anybody got a link to the full plan |
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 10:44
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 152 Joined: 18 Sep 2006 Member No.: 7,716 |
I've heard on BBC news this morning that plans are afoot to fine the owner of every uninsured car £100.
I've scoured t'internet but cant find any info. Is there anybody who could point me in the right direction. Thanks Daz |
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 10:44
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:40
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,689 Joined: 11 Sep 2007 From: Glasgow, Scotland Member No.: 13,654 |
Heard it on the radio today... Never caught the whole story but basically it is being proposed that the law is changed to mean that ALL vehicles need to be insured whether they are being used on the road or not. It would basically be illegal to own a vehicle and NOT insure it.
I find this incredible. I have been building my Mk2 Golf for 4 years now and there is absolutely no chance that I would be using it on the road without the necessary cover, even if it was 'almost' finished. I store it in my own garage and see no reason WHY I should insure the damned thing. I also have a van at the moment which is needing very little money to put right and get MoT'd but I am storing it on my private property and it is not being used. Under the proposed new legislation I would be required to insure BOTH of these vehicles... Can someone else maybe drop some info into this thread to clarify the situation and help put my mind at ease before I start assassinating politicians? Also, what is your views on this insurance nonsense? -------------------- I am who I am... If you do not know who I am then treat me as such... Words of wisdom are easily handed down but the message conveyed is most likely lost within the mis-interpretation of what is put forth. Mortality is short lived but long lasting...
Want to hear about MY success stories??? Well, I'm still alive! Gotta count for something... I've also managed to re-produce... As for the law, well I like to think I have made head way on occasion but it's a cut throat world and no sooner have you won than you're taking part in another race....... Guilty until proven innocent... Speed doesn't kill... Poorly designed, constructed and maintained roads do... Do not try to bend the rules for that is impossible. Instead, first understand that there are NO rules... When will we learn that ‘teaching someone a lesson’ never teaches anything but resentment -- that it only inspires the recipient to greater acts of defiance. – Harry Browne |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:53
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 152 Joined: 18 Sep 2006 Member No.: 7,716 |
I'm assuming the only way that this could be managed, is if insurers were to issue 'insurance' for SORN'd vehicles, for a notional fee, which would not cover the vehicle for being driven!
Other than that, I cannot see how this would, or infact could work! How would traders be exempt? Daz |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:57
Post
#4
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
According to the government twat interviewed on Radio 4, SORNed vehicles wouldn't be required to have insurance.
But then according to him all that was going to happen is that those super-accurate DVLA and MIB databases would be queried to spit out letters "requesting" an explanation if a vehicle wasn't covered, and if there was some reasonable explanation forthcoming then there'd be no problem. I think we all know it won't work like that, and the onus will be on the motorist to prove their innocence, with increasingly draconian penalties if you don't give them the info they demand. Given the state of those databases I think we can all look forward to one of these polite requests at some point! -------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 13:21
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Sounds like TV Licensing.
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 13:38
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 257 Joined: 23 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,465 |
As someone who currently owns some 7 vehicles yet only insures 2 (2 track only vehicles, 2 projects, one bare frame) and in the past has owned even more. I've fallen foul of SORN before and the whole idea fills me with dread, if there was a "It's off the road, it's staying off the road and never going to go back on until I or someone else tells you" option it wouldn't be so bad but as it stands it stinks. I feel another letter to my MP coming on.
Sounds like TV Licensing. Oh dear, it really is going to go all wrong. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 20:49
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 21 Dec 2004 From: ------------- Member No.: 2,073 |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 23:53
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 16 Joined: 18 Jan 2009 Member No.: 25,552 |
who do they have dreaming up these ideas, I also have three vehicles, one insured and two vw projects in garage on private land which are not. can`t see it working, we fill out sorn's so we don't pay road tax but they want us to insure them even though we can't use them on road without tax .
they must be making too much money on people not filling in their sorn quickly enough that they have come up with this idea for insurance. but if SORNed vehicles wouldn't be required to have insurance what is the point to it all as its not going to stop people driving with no licence...insurance...tax..mot.....etc.... |
|
|
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 - 09:38
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Administrators Posts: 9,760 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wiltshire, UK Member No.: 4 |
What will the Registered Keeper be required to insure against?
Perhaps it will be the risk of the authorities being too stupid to understand the meaning of a Statutory Off Road Notification – SORN. -------------------- Regards, Mika
Useful Info: 1 Read This First 2. 14-day Rule; 3. 6-month Rule. 4. NIP Wizard. 5. Success Stories. |
|
|
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 - 15:11
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
You are right Mika.
But they do know what it means, they just don't give a stuff. -------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 - 15:48
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,751 Joined: 12 Aug 2004 From: hampshire Member No.: 1,514 |
Car 1 tr4 is registered to me but is un taxed and exempt from sorrn because it is off the road last 18 years. I cant insure for road use as its a rolling shell. I have a recent logbook as I\it moved house recently
Car 2 tr4 is currently cat c write off. I dont have a log book. I cant finish it untill they make the next run of pannels Car 3 yaris is regestered to disabled wife who cannot drive at the moment. Why should I/she be forced to insure it? Car 4 insured, taxed,registered. day to day run about This post has been edited by anton: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 - 15:55 -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 26 Jan 2009 - 03:34
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
144B
Exceptions to section 144A offence // The fourth condition is that— (a) the registered keeper is at the relevant time the person keeping the vehicle, (b) at the relevant time the vehicle is not used on a road or other public place, and © the registered keeper has by the relevant time complied with any requirements under subsection (7)(a) below that he is required to have complied with by the relevant or any earlier time. (6) // (7) Regulations may make provision— (a) for the purposes of subsection (4)(b) and (5)© above, requiring a person in whose name a vehicle is registered to furnish such particulars and make such declarations as may be prescribed, and to do so at such times and in such manner as may be prescribed, and (b) for the purposes of subsection (6)© above, as to the persons to whom, the times at which and the manner in which the theft of a vehicle is to be notified. I'm not an expert but it sounds like if its off the road and SORN'd then this does not apply, comments from Southpaw who knows how to read the mumbo jumbo appreciated! Simon -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Mon, 26 Jan 2009 - 12:34
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,695 Joined: 23 Apr 2004 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 1,131 |
The whole thing is madness.
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Jan 2009 - 12:38
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,103 Joined: 14 Dec 2007 From: Devon Member No.: 16,048 |
The whole thing is madness. I am inclined to think they should get the existing system (in the form of accurate records at DVLA and MIB) in working order before introducing this sledgehammer. -------------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Quis tacet consentit
|
|
|
Mon, 26 Jan 2009 - 16:18
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
agreed - bet they never will get the data clean, if anything it will get dirtier as the root causes of the dirty data are not fixed and transactions are continually applied to the data.
-------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 10:46 |