Hi there,

I have read a few topics here about people in a similar situation but thought I would detail my case do I can get tailored advice to my dilemma.

I only passed my driving test in January 2013. I am self employed performer and I am a 2nd name driver on my insurance policy which is with ecar insurance (zenith insurance is the underwriter)

I was driving back from a show last night and traffic cops pulled me over. The driver asked where I was coming from and I explained I was coming home from work. As I had a large PA system on the back of my car. He said he had stopped my for a routine breath test and asked if I had been drinking to which I replied absolutely not! He then said I can smell alcohol. I took the test and got a reading of zero.

He then asked me did I have business insurance and I said no. He then said what is your policy for and I replied it was social, domestic and pleasure. He said so you don't have insurance? I was very confused at this point as I genuinely never realised I needed business insurance on my vehicle. I know that ignorance is not a defence but I genuinely had no idea. He then continued on to give me a lecture about using the car for work and having the policy I have means iam driving with no insurance.

He then issued me with a £300 fine and 6 points. I came home and read all the fine print on my policy and I am actually not covered for commuting to work!!! I never knew this. I just assumed that I would have been.

Some of my friends parents are police and I have had different advice one said I should appeal let it go to court and tell them the truth that I never realised that I needed business insurance. I was none the wiser that my policy doesn't even cover me
to commute to and from work. Another friends parent who is an officer said that the courts won't really by sympathetic towards me not being fully clued up on my policy and what when I can use my car with my policy. She also said the outcome could be much worse than just paying the fine and taking the points.

The fine doesn't bother me. It's he 6 points. I could even understand and deal with 3 points but the 6 points feels excessive.

I have only been driving 9 months and I am scared to go out and drive again now.

Can anyone give me some advice? They also said they are going to speak to my brother who is the first named driver and find out if he knew that the policy didn't include work use. Depending on my brothers reply he said I could even then get charged with theft of a car???

I am so confused. I now understand the black and white that i should have business insurance. But I mean I am shocked that my policy doesn't cover me for commuting!!

What is the best way to deal with this? Am I best to just bite the bullet pay the fine and take the points and learn a very valuable lesson. Or should I fight this? What would be likely of me getting less points if I appeal it??

Thanks in advance for any help/guidance.

On the facts given it appears clear you were not insured. It is a mute point if being self employed means you were commuting or that you were stiill working. Whichever it will amount to the same thing. Based on this you are unlikely to be found not guilty so an FPN is normally the best offer you will get as they simply won't give you less points.

However as a new driver you need to balance the fact that with 6 points your licence will be revoked so we should explore whether there are exceptional reasons not to endorse.

EdiT

Just to add the reference to theft is oblique but the reasoning may be as follows. The Owner of the vehicle must give permission for you to use it (it can't be your car as the primary insured is someone else and this may be fronting if it is yours) so if you are not insured then they permit no insurance. Pretty much the same penalty. Many owners will on learning this say they didn't in fact give permission or permission for the use intended therefore the vehicle is taken without the owners consent (TWOC). Things like this tend to test friendships especially if there is an element of helping someone out by fronting.

I asked them about giving me 6 points and they told me I would still be able to drive? They said that in the future I would need to extra careful and be vigilant about my tyres and speeding and not running red lights etc... They said if I obtain any more additional points my licence will go back to provisional status.

So will my licence be revoked or not?

The DVLA will revoke if you reach 6 points within the first 2 years.

The car was bought for me and my brother to take my mum places as she is elderly. It's just a wee run around car.

I don't work in the UK a lot and the car is shared between us. He will take her places at nights/weekends and if he is at work cause I'm self employed I am more flexible so I can take her to any hospital appointments etc...

So if he says that he did give me permission to use the car he will also get £300 fine and 6 points??

Who is the registered keeper and who actually owns it?

If your brother is down as the keeper and primary insured then it is a possibility that they may pursue him for permitting no insurance (Traffic cops tend to follow up, local officers less so). The penalty is broadly similar to that of using. What you don't want is an allegation that the car is yours and you just used your brother to get lower insurance. That would fall under the heading of fraud and is far worse.

The car is registered and owned to my brother. It wasn't intended for me to get cheap insurance we both use the vehicle as a run around to assist my mum with things etc...

Your brother needs to check his policy very carefully

It strikes me as unlikely that two named drivers would have different levels of cover
If the policy is SDP only, there's a high possibility that your brother isn't insured to drive to work either

Ecar are well-known here for their false economy insurance and most of us wouldn't touch the company
If he needs to add commuting cover, they will charge a significant admin fee

It's a very common situation
Most drivers think that SDP includes driving to work

It's his responsibility however to check what his insurance actually covers
In my view, it's a disgrace that comparison websites don't flag up "are you sure?" if a buyer with an occupation attempts to buy insurance that doesn't let him drive for any part of the journey to work.

Regarding your case, accepting the fixed penalty is your only option
It's a strict liability offence and points are only avoided if an employee was driving a company vehicle and had every reason to believe it was insured by his employer. A lot of insurance companies won't touch performers and a court could reach the conclusion that you were fronting

You can drive with six points until DVLA revoke your licence for collecting them in the first two years

But as stated, you didn't just use it to take your elderly mum places:



IMHO, i don't see this ending well.

I would have thought being a use issue, permitting maybe a little more tricky as They could well say that they thought the vehicle was being used as per insurance coverage.

Unfortunately I agree.

However the brother needs to contact the broker/ insurance company 1st thing tomorrow am. If possible get online today. Get yourselves covered as your now aware of the situation. It may play to your brothers benefit later.

I am absolutely devastated.

Me and my brother both just took it for granted that the policy would cover commuting.

However the ticket was issued cause I didn't have business insurance. Which I never knew I needed.

So basically I'm going to loose my licence indefinitely.

I had no idea I wasn't allowed to drive my car to and from work and neither did my brother. I have spoken with him and he never realised either that the policy didn't include commuting to/from work.

I'm so angry that such a minor thing has lost me my licence and cost me £300.

Anyone have any ideas on possible ways I could fight it? What would be the best argument for me to make?

Thanks

TBH, i don't see you have any defence and therefore no argument.

BTH, commuting to a place of employment is not the same as driving as part of being self-employed. For that you need full business use.

The car was bought primarily for us to have a vehicle to take her to run her errands.

I'm not trying to say it doesn't get used for anything else cause that would be a lie. That's the reason we are both insured on it is so when one isn't available the other is. Like I said previously I work abroad a lot of the time and my brother works full time so if he's working I'm free and if I am away on business he can use it.

Bottom line as with all cases like this is simple.

If your insurance company will confirm in writing that at the time of the stop you were covered for the specific purpose of the journey then fine. If not, best advice is to pay up.

Ignorance of policy details is no defence.

Its unlikely your brother has much to worry about IMO. Police use scare tactics such as threatening to bring your brother into it, although in reality I doubt they will prosecute in this case. If you had no insurance in place for you on the car at all, they might pursue him, but in this instance I can't see them taking it far.

FYI it is possible to have differing levels of cover for different drivers on the policy. The main driver/policyholder can have a higher level of coverage (i.e. business/commuting) than named drivers. However its unlikely an insurance company will give higher coverage to a named driver. I had to specifically say that my named drivers may use the car for business usage, which worked out a few quid more expensive.

In your situation there is nothing really worth fighting. You didn't have the correct level of cover. Unfortunately ignorance of the law won't work. However you can apply for a provisional again straght away, which allows you to at least get a moped (after sitting a CBT) until you pass your full theory and practical tests again. Your probably looking at at least 10-12 weeks (assuming you pass both tests first time and depending on where you are. Keep an eye out for cancellation tests remember) before you get appointments to pass both parts again.

Can I drive the car just now? Or is that breaking the law? How does it work?

Just spoke to a police officer friend of the family and he said under the road traffic act if they are saying I was driving with the wrong class of insurance he is sure they should have confiscated my car. Also he said that they should have made me aware that they were making me an offer with the ticket. I thought it was compulsory. Also the officers attitude was incredibly intimidating and he told me he could smell alcohol before taking the test. Which was obviously clear.

You can still drive the car for the puposes which the policy allows until your licence is revoked.



All irrelevant.

Either pay the CoFP, or take the matter to court. But no point in taking it to court unless you have a defence, which so far, you do not.

Yes you can drive just now. Until you pay and have the points added to your license, you are defo fine. I think your actually fine to drive until you get a DVLA letter advising your license has been revoked.

They could have impounded your car, but have chosen to be decent it seems to you and not do that. Otherwise that would be yet more expense. Your tickets is an offer to avoid going to court. You could plead not guilty, or indeed guilty at court, but any fine would be likely to be substantially higher, and you would be looking at 6-8 points (although it would almost certainly be 6).

Why did the officers tell me last night that I wouldn't loose my licence and suggested that I am extra vigilant with all aspects of my car and my driving so as to not get any more points which would then demote my licence back to provisional status.

That's exactly what they said to me.

I said "Will I loose my licence?" He replied "No however, you can't obtain anymore points so make sure your tyres are ok and you are driving correctly and safely all at all times"

So they lied basically?

What occupation did your brother declare for you to the Insurers ? I would be very surprised if Ecar / Zenith would accept someone in the performing arts / music industry as a policyholder or named driver even more so for driving to work

There could have been a siezure of the vehicle however it is at the discretion of the officer and it doesn't have to be done. I personally hardly ever bother to seize vehicles especially where it is obvious that it is more ignorance or mistake in relation to insurance. The points and fine seem punishment enough and I see siezure more as a way of getting deliberately uninsured cars off the road and not akin to when people can simply make a call and get a directly insured person to pick up the vehicle.

Amazing how many police officers are even less aware of the law than many lay people, perhaps he should watch traffic cops etc! The officer could have seized the car and did you a huge favour by not doing so as you'd have been walking home and had to pay £150 to get your car back......

Who knows? We weren't there. Doesn't change the situation.

Was the officer aware that you would be affected by the new drivers act? But his potential mistake doesn't assist.

Or he was just ignorant of the legislation in regards new drivers ....or he may not have bothered to check how long you had held a license so didn't realise you fell under the remit of the new drivers legislation....or he just made a mistake and it slipped his mind you were a new driver.

It's all irrespective as it isn't he who revokes your license it's the DVLA (to all intents) so you can continue driving until they contact you.

Most likely the officer did not realise you were a new driver. I am sorry but I do not see a way out of this for you, you had documentation from the insurance company stating what uses of the car were covered and either did not read it or did not understand it and did not ask what it meant. As such, a court is not going to be particularly sympathetic to you, there is a lot of bureaucracy associated with owning and driving a vehicle and you have to understand and follow it. The best way for ward for you now seems to be to accept the fixed penalty. If you do that, I doubt whether your brother will be pursued for permitting you to drive with no insurance. In due course the DVLA will revoke your licence, but until then you can continue to drive for the purposes for which your policy covers you. When your licence is revoked, you can then apply for a new provisional licence and go through the process of taking your test again.

When you next insure the car, make sure the policy covers all the uses to which you and your brother might wish to put the car. Depending on how much you are abroad it might be worth considering not driving the car and not having you as a named driver on the policy, because your 6 points are going to increase the premium.

What would have happened if the OP had had an accident after the stop, and after the police had decided the insurance cover was not valid?

By letting him drive home surely the police were guilty of permitting him to drive without insurance, or is this not the case?

Me and my brother both just took it for granted that the policy would cover commuting.

Most people do

I suspect that "not insured for driving to work" has only become common since the rise of comparison sites and the bargain-basement companies that offer the lowest prices. Most consumers aren't checking the details that a broker would have

It won't help you but your brother should go through the list of questions that he answered to see if Ecar mis-sold him the policy
If they did, a complaint is in order when they charge to upgrade the policy

In future always check out the company
The results of the Google search term "ecar review" would have told you everything you needed to know just from the summaries

No, permit requires the person permitting to have some form of control over the vehicle.

Personally if I knew there was no valid insurance I always seized unless someone else could lawfully drive it away. But then Traffic cops aren't known for their sentimental streak.

Sorry to be going off topic, but the police stopping the OP did have control over the vehicle as they could have seized it to prevent him driving.

They let the OP drive away whilst believing he wasn't insured, thereby allowing him to continue to commit an offence.

Take it to the Flame Pit, please.

I use ecar and it cost me no extra to add commuting to SDP

Also in order for named drivers to be covered for business you need business class 2. Business class 1 only covers the main driver for business, class 2 covers all named drivers for business also.

I have decided to take this to court.

I sat down with a lawyer yesterday (road traffic convictions specialist) and he has advised that I take it to court.


Will keep you all updated on the outcome!




I am mainly a booking agent for entertainment in hotels in the Middle East. Hence why I said I rarely work in this country.

That is the main guts of my job.

Which route has been suggested? (Guilty or not guilty?)

Did the lawyer make you aware of the potential costs etc.?

Your lawer is going to get paid. Win or lose and I don't see how you can win as you admitted using for a use your not covered for. I didn't know isn't likely to change that.

This is basically what has been discussed with other family friends who are officers one of which is a traffic cop as well as the lawyer.

The officer clearly had an attitude he was incredibly dismissive and overly assuming with regards to the alcohol.

He let me continue drive the vehicle after repeatedly telling me I was not insured. He also failed to tell me that the FPN was infact an offer at no time did he mention this to me and as a new driver being pulled by the police I was so incredibly nervous I thought it was cumpulosry.

He knew I was a new driver as I protested the 6 points as I knew the outcome would be my licence being revoked. He was incredibly confident in saying that it wouldn't be telling me "I know what I'm talking about son" I quizzed him and his colleague over this a few times before I let it go as I thought right surely he knows what he's talking about.

To me in the cold day light I think he was trying to give me the ticket and get me out of the car. I understand and I actually agree with the majority of people on this forum. Ignorance is not a valid excuse. However, he issued the fpn incorrectly he have me false information which made me more inclined to stop quizzing them and overall his conduct was completely unprofessional.

As for the fronting talk with regards to the insurance that is bullshit. The car is shared nearly every day actually. My brother has the car just now. So they can try and pull that one of they wish but we are confident with that.

I have already logged an official complaint with police Scotland and the officer who gave me the ticket was infact a Sargent. Another Sargent from a different station called me and I discussed the situation with him who is now in turn going to speak with him and let him know I have filled an official complaint. I understand this complaints process won't alter the FPN but I did this due to his work conduct.

If anyone can think of any points that are worth researching discussing with my lawyer like the fact he let me drive away on the vehicle when 10 minutes earlier he was banging on about how I wasn't insured then please share any info/suggestions my way.

In hindsight I fully respect that I was driving with the wrong insurance but this was a genuie mistake. I am a level headed guy I don't drink never been in trouble with the police before and usually am incredibly organised.

I have done plenty of charity work and always maintain my car to ensure its road worthy. I just can't believe I have been pulled on such a small technicality that is going to cost me my licence. It just seems so severe.





I fully understand my lawyer gets paid either way. I also fully understand the potential risks.

That may be true but don't let that blinker your legal position at court. Same about the breath test - it doesn't change any facts.

Have you contacted the insurer to see if you were actually covered for the given use?

Just realised this was in Scotland - should have twigged from your username...

Did the lawyer discuss 'special reasons not to endorse'?

Im at a loss to work out what your beef is and how you think you can possibily win.

If i had been stopped for no insurance and despite the police officer knowing this allowed me to carry on home without confiscating my vehicle id be praising him not making complaints.If he had real attitude you would have been walking home.Making complaints may well come back and bite you.


You seem to be hinging this on matters that wont change anything such as the breath test, his attitude and the fact he didnt cotton on you were a new driver.
While it might piss you off the facts are you drove without the right cover your doing not his and you recieved the minimum punishment for that but it looks like thats going to change...

good luck.

Cotton on? I repeatedly told him I was a new driver and that this would make me loose my licence. He was fully aware I am a new driver yet still continued to give me incorrect information. He should know exactly what would happen by giving me the 6 points he was adamant that I wouldn't get my licence revoked.

Your letting side issues get in the way of your decision making, yes the officer should have know that the provisions of the new drivers act mean you would have your license revoked but it is not him or even the court that revokes it, it's the DVLA in effect. Whether he knew this, had forgotten or or was simply lying makes no difference to your use of the vehicle.

What would you have differently if he had said "yes, you will have your licence revoked"?

I understand your frustration but instead of venting your mistake at others i would sit down and consider the facts and only the ones that matter to a court.

Spelt out...

you were driving a vehicle without proper cover

you admitted this

The ONLY way out i can see is to call your insurance company and get them to agree to show cover for that occasion.

Ive seen freak outcomes in court happen but the probability is this is going to cost you not only a fist full of money but 6 points is the minimum for no insurance not the maximum.


If you fancy trying your luck then go ahead but please update us with the outcome you just never know.......

This looks like it's headed for a hard landing

There's nothing in your account so far that gives a defence to the charge of driving without the correct insurance - a six point offence

Your whole argument seems to be that he misled you about the consequences of six points
As the alternative was to let you off the offence, I can't see it impressing the court

fedup has given a pretty good assessment of what is the reality of events.

Your complaint will simply be pended until after your conviction. At that time the officer will simply say he was cutting you some slack in letting you drive off and it is in fact you who misunderstood what was being said. You also need to understand that he has saved you circa £150 recovery fee and £30 a day storage so perhaps you may actually think that having saved you paying for recovery and walking home he has in fact done you a favour.

So forget all of these issues and concentrate on the only thing which counts. Contact your insurance company give them the true facts and ask if you were covered. Unless they are prepared to put in writing you were then all you can do is pay up and sort out a new test.

dont the scots discount the points as well as a fine for an early guilty plea?? Would rejecting the fixed penalty and pleading guilty at court result in lower points than in england

There is only one thing that matters, and that is whether or not you were insured for the use to which you were putting the car at the time. If you were you need to prove it, that is your obligation and you can only do that with a statement from your insurance company. If you cannot prove you were insured then you are guilty and accepting the fixed penalty is the cheapest way forward. Nothing else matters, so concentrate on what matters and forget what does not.

Would the outcome have been different if the OP had more than 2 years driving? I doubt it. Agree with the others, see if your insurer will cover you for that event.

AIUI they can't discount below the statutory minimum. So for no insurance this is 6 points.

(But speeding can be discounted from 6 to 4, for example, as 3 is the stat min)

Has it ever been tested in court that having the "wrong" policy actually means you have *no* insurance for the purposes of the law. If it has, so be it. I was under some impression that giving incorrect information to an insurance company didn't necessarily invalidate the 3rd party aspect of the insurance, only the parts that affected the insuree.

I refer to Financial Ombudsman



If the requirement is not to repudiate a claim even where there is misrepresentation (i.e. SDP instead of business), unless the misrepresentation was deliberate or negligent misrepresentation, wouldn't it be true to say that there IS insurance in place until such time that deliberate or negligent misrepresentation is proven?

Also

puts the onus back on the insurance company. Expecting an insuree to always "know" is not necessarily good enough. A question like "Do you ever use your vehicle to travel to any place of work of any kind" would be fairly explicit. Was an explicit question asked or was it a "please tick the box for the cover you want"

We are very quick here sometimes to say non-insurance is an absolute offence, but in this sort of case, I am not so sure that a good legal might find some interesting angles.

The fact is there WAS insurance so the "absolute angle" is actually positive. The question is does the misrepresentation invalidate the cover to the extent that an offence of "no insurance" is proven.

here's a link BTW http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publ...-disclosure.htm

EDIT. The link and quotes above come from an old page.

here is the up to date page. The information is virtually the same but worded differently

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publ...e_insurance.htm