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.
Forget points, he will get the death penalty.
Mate has a court summons for driving without a license and insurance!
- Thread starter mattyprice4004
- Start date
Forget points, he will get the death penalty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 3,232
- Location
- ..
What can he expect as punishment?
At a guess, he will likely get points and a large fine, maybe they will show some leniency f the crash wasnt his fault. Or maybe they wont and ban him :/
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 17,616
- Location
- Bristol
If you insure it.
My point was more that everyone seemed to view it as a case "omg, unrestricted! That means he'll have been doing a billion miles an hour sideways killing children!" or something along those lines.
Don't get me wrong, I agree though, he is wrong to have ridden with an incorrect license and insurance that covers him on the lesser license. I just don't see that there is a huge need for him to have the book thrown at him.
I've known people with restricted bikes that have over time managed to internally destroy the restriction, so technically they were riding illegally. Should they get the book thrown at them for not knowing the restriction has corroded?
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 1,764
- Location
- Leicester UK
I don't understand your point either. Legally yes you could go out and buy a 355 and drive it at under 70.
As much as i think this guy is a muppet for not restricting his bike and having the paperwork to say he's done so, I do think that some people are being a bit harsh. If it wasn't his fault, he was doing a sensible speed, riding the same bike he's insured to, but without the washers in the carbs, then its a bit harsh to say that he's xyz and should be lynched. It's not different (except the licence restriction) to the guys on here that remap, mod, or put wheels on their cars and don't declare it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 17,616
- Location
- Bristol
He means valid insurance.
The problem is that it was his fault as he should never have been on the road to start with (invalid license) and therefore should not have been there to hit/get hit by the car. This is the view the courts take and this is why he can expect to have the book thrown at him.
It is totally different because modding your car doesn't invalidate your license....
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,253
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
The point was he wasn't driving / riding something as in accordance with his insurance, valid licence for that class of machine or not, that was my point.
Its a stupid law.
The insurance company take no account of the restriction when it comes to the cost of the policy (eg insuring an R1 costs just as much if its restriced to 33bhp), they will still pay out to a third party if you have an accident (which is the minimum legal requirement - the fact they may persue the policy holder for costs afterwards makes no difference as the 3rd party gets their car fixed) so theres no reason to prosecute for driving without insurance.
Driving outside the terms of a license is perfectly valid though, but its still a crap law - I bet the car drivers on here wouldn't have liked to have been restricted to 1.0 Corsa's for the first 2 years!
The insurance company take no account of the restriction when it comes to the cost of the policy (eg insuring an R1 costs just as much if its restriced to 33bhp), they will still pay out to a third party if you have an accident (which is the minimum legal requirement - the fact they may persue the policy holder for costs afterwards makes no difference as the 3rd party gets their car fixed) so theres no reason to prosecute for driving without insurance.
Driving outside the terms of a license is perfectly valid though, but its still a crap law - I bet the car drivers on here wouldn't have liked to have been restricted to 1.0 Corsa's for the first 2 years!
You seem to be suggesting the accident would not have happened if he was riding a 33bhp machine at the exact same speed, time and place?
Just because it's a 'crap' law in your opinion doesn't mean he shouldn't obey it.
Do you want to quote the bit where I said he shouldn't have obeyed it?
Speed != Acceleration.
The restricted bike can't accelerate as quickly.
Therefore maybe he was accelerating upto 40mph at a faster rate than he could have on a desrestricted bike.
For example - a Gallardo and a Punto can both do 70mph - put your foot down and one will accelerate a hell of a lot quicker.
Maybe the biker was accelerating hard (upto 40mph) at a rate faster than he could have, had his bike been restricted.
The insurance company are correct - the insurance is invalid.
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 718
You can receive 6 - 8 points for having no insurance and 3 - 6 points for riding otherwise than in accordance with your licence, and so I would assume your friend will be having to take his tests again.
Just out of interest, how did they find out that the bike wasn't restricted?
Just out of interest, how did they find out that the bike wasn't restricted?
Last edited:
No. I'm suggesting the accident would not have happened if he hadn't been on the road. Which he should not have been (on that vehicle) as his license wasn't valid (for that vehicle).
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 1,764
- Location
- Leicester UK
Moley said:
The same goes for a lot of other people on here, but I didn't see anyone calling for the blood of the guy towing a trailer that was too heavy for his licence and, therefore, insurance.
The TDI remap brigade who don't declare the mod are just as liable to the invalid insurance aspect, and they don't get the lectures that this guy is getting.
As are the people who change their wheels, tint their windows, install breathing mods etc.
Last edited:
However the people with remaps, new wheels, tinted windows do not carry a license which specifically says they cannot do that.
Anyone willing to spend money on a remap probably has a nice car they are remapping and so would be bloody foolish not to declare the map for insurance purposes - I know I'd want to get my own vehicle repaired in the case of an accident if it had been mapped.
As for wheels and other "mods" - well again you take your choice and suffer the consequence.
Tiniting front windows, these days more or less any tint is illegal so it shouldn't be done.
As I know plenty of people who zip around on motorbikes and it's known a heavy tint can restrict vision, I would happily lecture anyone who has decided to illegally tint their window as it could be one of my mates they pull out in front of.
There is a significant difference between invalidating your LICENSE and invalidating your INSURANCE.
If you have modified your vehicle to the extent that you are no longer driving a roadworthy vehicle or that you have been tested and deemed incapable of driving then you should not be on the road. FULL STOP.
The OP's mate knew full well what he was doing and decide to chance his luck. He got caught and now needs to "man up" and take his punishment and learn from his mistakes.