My car was caught speeding but I wasn't driving it???
#2
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does he not have his own car insurance with 3 party liability cover on driving other cars?
If not, he's f*cked as you now have to declare who was driving the car at the time of the offence and if you lie and get caught then you will be charged with perverting the course of justice.
It's his own fault I'm afraid; and what was he doing driving your car with no insurance?!?!
Ns04
If not, he's f*cked as you now have to declare who was driving the car at the time of the offence and if you lie and get caught then you will be charged with perverting the course of justice.
It's his own fault I'm afraid; and what was he doing driving your car with no insurance?!?!
Ns04
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 27 May 2009 at 08:57 PM.
#6
Central ticket office don't do that.
Edit:
Just to add, what if his details were not on the MID, there are many valid reasons why they wouldn't be, driving on traders insurance etc
Edit:
Just to add, what if his details were not on the MID, there are many valid reasons why they wouldn't be, driving on traders insurance etc
Last edited by Dedrater; 27 May 2009 at 09:06 PM.
Trending Topics
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mars
Posts: 11,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your "friend" who is from abroad and with no insurance borrowed your car and then drove too fast and got clocked? You need to choose your friends more carefully.
That sounds to me like a whole World of trouble...
That sounds to me like a whole World of trouble...
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good job there are no cops reading this thread <clicks print screen>
The bad news is that you need to take into account the use/cause/permit parts of the offence.
The friend used the car without insurance.
The owner permitted the friend to use the car without insurance - that's an offence by both parties.
Section 143 (1) & (2) Road Traffic Act 1988 states it is an offence for a person: to use on a road at any time or cause or permit to be used a motor vehicle without a policy of insurance in respect of third-party claims
Section 144A Road Traffic Act
If a motor vehicle registered under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 does not meet the insurance requirements the person in whose name the vehicle is registered is guilty of an offence.
Section 165 of the Road Traffic Act 1988:
You may require any of the following persons to produce their insurance certificate:
a) a person driving the motor vehicle... on a road
b) a person who you have reasonable cause to believe had been the driver... at the time of an accident; or
c)a person whom you have reasonable cause to believe to have committed an offence in relation to the use of a motor vehicle on the road.
Section 165A provides power to seize a vehicle without adequate insurance cover.
Your choices are:
- simply take the 3 points and pay the fine, hope they don't query the insurance - and learn from this.
- don't accept this fine, pass on his details so they can send the NIP on to him - and hope he doesn't cough to not having insurance
- admit that you permitted him to drive your vehicle without adequate insurance, get yourelf in the poo big time but sleep well knowing you've told the truth.
Take your pick... best of luck.
The bad news is that you need to take into account the use/cause/permit parts of the offence.
The friend used the car without insurance.
The owner permitted the friend to use the car without insurance - that's an offence by both parties.
Section 143 (1) & (2) Road Traffic Act 1988 states it is an offence for a person: to use on a road at any time or cause or permit to be used a motor vehicle without a policy of insurance in respect of third-party claims
Section 144A Road Traffic Act
If a motor vehicle registered under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 does not meet the insurance requirements the person in whose name the vehicle is registered is guilty of an offence.
Section 165 of the Road Traffic Act 1988:
You may require any of the following persons to produce their insurance certificate:
a) a person driving the motor vehicle... on a road
b) a person who you have reasonable cause to believe had been the driver... at the time of an accident; or
c)a person whom you have reasonable cause to believe to have committed an offence in relation to the use of a motor vehicle on the road.
Section 165A provides power to seize a vehicle without adequate insurance cover.
Your choices are:
- simply take the 3 points and pay the fine, hope they don't query the insurance - and learn from this.
- don't accept this fine, pass on his details so they can send the NIP on to him - and hope he doesn't cough to not having insurance
- admit that you permitted him to drive your vehicle without adequate insurance, get yourelf in the poo big time but sleep well knowing you've told the truth.
Take your pick... best of luck.
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know one SN member who allowed someone to test drive their motor, which was then caught by a scamera, and then gave in the Spanish drivers details who received the NIP at an address in Tenerife.
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#18
#19
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: www.Surreyscoobies.co.uk
Posts: 2,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all What were you thinking, why would you let someone drive your car uninsured.... You could have wrecked someones life and had no way of paying them compensation. That was VERY VERY stupid, uninsured drivers are one of the reasons everyone else on this forum has such high premiums.
Rant over.
Second.
Chances are they wont go after a person from overseas but if they cant trace him or they think it sounds a bit dodgy you could get done anyways. You have to prove you were not driving in this case.
Second as above you have left yourself open to use cause permit.
You have permitted a person to drive your vehicle on the road uninsured. There is a chance you might get a court date for that.
Time will tell on this one, You may well end up in court as you have broken the law anyways. You might get no further action.
Rant over.
Second.
Chances are they wont go after a person from overseas but if they cant trace him or they think it sounds a bit dodgy you could get done anyways. You have to prove you were not driving in this case.
Second as above you have left yourself open to use cause permit.
You have permitted a person to drive your vehicle on the road uninsured. There is a chance you might get a court date for that.
Time will tell on this one, You may well end up in court as you have broken the law anyways. You might get no further action.
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks to me that you are guilty of the offence of permitting the vehicle to be used by an uninsured driver and face a licence endorsement of 6-8 points and a fine which will vary depending on the circumstances and whether the Defendant was using or permitting to use the vehicle.
If the cops gave you an endorsable FPN and 6 points for this, you'd also be looking somewhere in the region of a £200 fine.
#23
Scooby Regular
Looks like a no win situation, maybe this is a clear case of, honesty is the best policy?
Even though I am sure that if you just accepted the points and paid the fine, you would hear nothing more on the matter.
I am making a mental note * do not let my mate who's been bugging me for months to drive my baby*
Even though I am sure that if you just accepted the points and paid the fine, you would hear nothing more on the matter.
I am making a mental note * do not let my mate who's been bugging me for months to drive my baby*
#27
Scooby Regular
Also thinking.... maybe getting done for speeding was a lucky escape. Letting a non insured driver behind the wheel of any car especially a 4wd speed machine, seems a bit of a odd thing to allow. The outcome may have been much worse.
Or am I alone in thinking that?
Or am I alone in thinking that?