PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Insurance question
K3bab
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:13
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



Stopped for alleged 90 in 70 on motorway 3 weeks ago by undercover cops. Given verbal NIP. Heard nothing since. Insurance renewal has come up. Question: do I declare to the insurance company that I’ve been stopped given I don’t yet know what the outcome of that will be? I can’t provide a factually correct statement of whether I will end up with 3 points, court summons, or speed awareness course until I officially receive that information from the police? My insurer is Admiral.

This post has been edited by K3bab: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:13
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:24
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,897
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Have you considered asking Admiral?


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K3bab
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:31
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
baggins1234
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 13:37
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 856
Joined: 17 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,849



QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:28
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,138
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



At the moment it isn't even a pending conviction, just a stop by police and a possibility (fairly high?) that something may come of it.
Check your T&Cs on what you must declare.
It varies with insurer, only common ground is if you don't declare what you must, you risk all sorts of pain.
Convictions almost certainly and deffo when renewing.
Pending convictions.... ie you've had the S172 or a summons, possibly required but I cannot remember ever seeing it.
Some are asking for courses to be declared now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K3bab
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 15:58
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



QUOTE (baggins1234 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:37) *
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?


The only thing I can find is this (attached)

To me it’s not really clear if I should be declaring or not

This post has been edited by K3bab: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 15:59
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:09
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,829
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:11
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:58) *
QUOTE (baggins1234 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:37) *
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?


The only thing I can find is this (attached)

To me it’s not really clear if I should be declaring or not


The phrase "been involved in" seems all-embracing, and definitely means you should declare. WHether you do it now or when renewing will depend on the policy wording.

When you're shopping around for better quotes, you need to consider the exact questions carefully.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K3bab
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:29
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:09) *
No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.


Would the term “pending prosecution” not cover the situation I am in?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:54
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,572
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



You will note that Admiral wants to know about Speed Awareness courses, removing the entire purpose of doing one

They say that they regard drivers that have done a course as higher risk
Tells you all you need to know about the courses' contribution to road safety
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 18:05
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,138
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:29) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:09) *
No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.


Would the term “pending prosecution” not cover the situation I am in?


To me, no it wouldn't.

The cops told you that you are possibly/likely/will be prosecuted.
That's a bit like my mum telling me to wait till my father got home.
Could mean that I would get a smack round the earhole or a talking to or nothing.

End of the day, cops need to progress it a little further (IMO) before it becomes pending.
It may disappear, could end up on a speed awareness course, could be a Fixed Penalty and three points, could be into court.

To me, until you have a piece of paper from the Old Bill saying we intend to prosecute, a conditional offer or a summons, it is simply a chat with some cops and a potentially poor outcome.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K3bab
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 19:04
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



I’m basically worried that interpreting their terms and conditions may give them an easy way to deny a claim later on if they disagree with my interpretation. I can’t believe that this isn’t a common situation and that there isn’t some general guidance on what one has to do in terms of declaring to insurance co
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 19:51
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,897
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



So ask Admiral...


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 20:25
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,138
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
So ask Admiral...


They will be the only people to give you a definitive answer.
You may not like it but they will give an answer.

I assume that you are shopping around and not just relying on Admiral ?
What they say (or their interpretation) could be totally academic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 14:53
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,350
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K3bab
post Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 15:22
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 May 2019
Member No.: 103,819



QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 15:53) *
Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse



It is all down to the technicalities. I may or may not have pending prosecution as the outcome may be a fixed penalty or a driving awareness course.

Anyway as per the recommendation on this thread I clarified with Admiral and they advised that since a verbal NIP is not a definitive pending prosecution, I do not need to worry about it at this stage and only declare it once I hear again from the police.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 16:27
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,248
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (K3bab @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 16:22) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 15:53) *
Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse



It is all down to the technicalities. I may or may not have pending prosecution as the outcome may be a fixed penalty or a driving awareness course.

Anyway as per the recommendation on this thread I clarified with Admiral and they advised that since a verbal NIP is not a definitive pending prosecution, I do not need to worry about it at this stage and only declare it once I hear again from the police.

Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 19:51
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,138
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 20:00
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,897
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



I’m with 666.


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 09:57
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,985
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.

So you're saying that if someone is stopped for, say, doing 99 mph on the motorway, old bill says "I'm reporting you for the offence" and a few months later he gets a summons / SJPN, the driver can claim a defence that he didn't receive a NIP within 14 days? Sorry DancindDad but that's clearly absurd, see section 1(a) here https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/1


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Tuesday, 23rd July 2019 - 02:07
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.