Mate has a court summons for driving without a license and insurance!

[mattyprice4004]

Hello motors!

My mate had an accident a good few months ago, and his court summons is here at last.

He had a smash with an Astra (not his fault) but was on a derestricted 750cc Honda when his license only covers a 33bhp bike, which has to be restricted.

For this he now has a court summons for driving without a valid license, and also without valid insurance I think. He does have insurance on the bike btw.

Will he get the book thrown at him; what can he expect as punishment?

 

[GeX]

i thought no-one rode restricted bikes, just had a bit of paper say it was restricted

 

[stoofa]

Although he may have paid for insurance I'm sure that one of the terms & conditions of his insurance is that he drives "within the restriction of his license".
So although (thankfully) anyone the **** runs into would get their damage repaired, they won't pay up for damage to his own vehicle and technically his insurance would be invalid.

 

[Defcon5]

Who checked if it was restricted if it was a non-fault accident?

 

[stockhausen]

He had a smash with an Astra (not his fault) ...

It never is

Will he get the book thrown at him ... ?

Sadly, probably not

 

[GeX]

It never is

oh get real, so having a non-restricted bike takes all blame off others and puts it all on the biker?

 

[Malt_Vinegar]

Are the insurance company able to drop third party cover? I thought that in these situations, they still had to provide cover to the other party?

 

[LizardKing]

Are the insurance company able to drop third party cover? I thought that in these situations, they still had to provide cover to the other party?

I believe they have a obligation to pay for 3rd party, but they can then recover there costs from the driver via the courts.
Dont quote me on that though

 

[mattyprice4004]

It never is

The woman pulled out onto a dual carriageway infront of him at point black range, he was doing about 40mph so had no chance.

 

[Dogbreath]

Are the insurance company able to drop third party cover? I thought that in these situations, they still had to provide cover to the other party?

Usually yes, but they can attempt to recover costs from the policy holder.

 

[Maximum Triceratops]

The woman pulled out onto a dual carriageway infront of him at point black range, he was doing about 40mph so had no chance.

He knew full well when he got on his bike that he wasnt legal whatsoever, so deserves to be punished accordingly.

 

[InvaderGIR]

He knew full well when he got on his bike that he wasnt legal whatsoever, so deserves to be punished accordingly.

:/

So he's doing 40mph, restricted bikes can still do over 80mph, they just get there slower. How does being on a restricted bike below the speed limit and being unable to stop means he should have the book thrown at him?

 

[Maximum Triceratops]

:/

So he's doing 40mph, restricted bikes can still do over 80mph, they just get there slower. How does being on a restricted bike below the speed limit and being unable to stop means he should have the book thrown at him?

Because technicaly he dosent have a valid licence or insurance, which is why he is being summoned to court.

 

[InvaderGIR]

Technically he was riding well within his limits and within the license though as well. Technicalities can be looked at in various ways.

 

[Cookie-Monster]

indeed, I dont see the issue,

yes it wasnt a fault accident
yes it was at a speed that he could achieve on 33bhp

no he wasnt insured or legally able to ride that bike.

both offences have the option of a dsicretionary Ban, although not a mandatory one.
I think anyone driving without insurance should face a mandatory ban and in this case your mate was driving without insurance.

 

[Hodders]

Sure, the accident may not have been his fault. But riding without insurance and without a licence is his fault.

It sounds harsh, but I have no sympathy for these idiots. He has a restricted licence for a reason - namely that the powers that be don't think he has the training/skill to ride an unrestricted bike. So what does he do, get on a bike that he shouldn't and have an accident.

Load the book into a catapult and throw it hard.

 

[djbenjo]

Did he admit that the bike was not restriced to 33bhp?
Was it tested on a dynometer?
I suggest a he get in touch with a specialist motoring solicitor. He is looking at 8 points+ or a ban and probably a fairly large fine.

 

[Eriedor]

Technically he was riding well within his limits and within the license though as well. Technicalities can be looked at in various ways.

Doesn't matter how he was riding the bike he didn't have valid insurance.........clear cut to me.

 

[mattyprice4004]

What can he expect as punishment?

Edit: He's had his license for less than 2 years so will have the book thrown at him if he gets more than 6 points.

 

[Firestar_3x]

I don't understand some peoples points, he was one a more powerfull bike doing the speeds his less powerfull bike can do so he should be ok?

Legally can i now go out buy a F355 and long as i drive it under 70mph i'm fine?.... hmm.... NO.