Taxed but not insured

rscosworth · 30 Mar 2010 at 18:31

Guys,

Is it ok to leave a car parked in the street without insurance (i am aware that i will not be able to claim in the event of fire/vandalism etc) but with an up to date tax disk?

Cheers

AtreuS · 30 Mar 2010 at 18:35

I think it has to be insured when on a public road.

http://www.nopenaltypoints.co.uk/unused-car-parked-street-does-need-insurance.html seems to suggest so.

rscosworth · 30 Mar 2010 at 18:55

Anything else to support this link?

OllyM · 30 Mar 2010 at 18:58

No it isn't - it's common sense really. What if your handbrake failed and your car rolled in to somebody else's property?

rscosworth · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:00

OllyM said:
No it isn't - it's common sense really. What if your handbrake failed and your car rolled in to somebody else's property?

Common sense is often different from the LAW.....

D.Roberts · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:00

nope has to be insured.

daz · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:31

Whose job is it to ensure a car is insured that is parked on the road? The registered keeper or the legal owner?

daz · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:32

OllyM said:
No it isn't - it's common sense really. What if your handbrake failed and your car rolled in to somebody else's property?

That would be covered under tort law.

[TW]Fox · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:37

daz said:
That would be covered under tort law.

It is covered by the fact no vehicle may be kept on the public highway without valid insurance against third party risks.

Disco Boy · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:37

OllyM said:
No it isn't - it's common sense really. What if your handbrake failed and your car rolled in to somebody else's property?

What if the same happened to any of my property? What if my garden shed collapsed and went through next door's stained glass window? Would it be illegal because I didn't have shed insurance?

Jokester · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:38

You must have motor insurance to use a vehicle on the public highway.

Last time this came up the debate was whether having it parked on the road meant that you were using it on the road or not. I don't think it was ever really settled, given that the car itself isn't insured and you the insured person aren't using the vehicle at the time it's parked. Personally I would suspect that daz is correct.

[TW]Fox · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:38

Disco Boy said:
What if the same happened to any of my property? What if my garden shed collapsed and went through next door's stained glass window? Would it be illegal because I didn't have shed insurance?

Your shed is not a vehicle therefore it is not covered by the provisions of the Road Traffic Act.

Locky · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:46

[TW]Fox;16267230 said:
Your shed is not a vehicle therefore it is not covered by the provisions of the Road Traffic Act.

This.

rscosworth · 30 Mar 2010 at 19:54

Ok, Thanks for this guy, another question has arose however.

Is it then ok to keep it on a driveway, uninsured but not declared SORN with valid tax? Someone has advised that to have valid tax there must be valid insurance? The .gov website is very confusing and I can understand how people can misinterpret certain aspects of it.

Thanks

daz · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:01

[TW]Fox;16267219 said:
It is covered by the fact no vehicle may be kept on the public highway without valid insurance against third party risks.

That's not the wording of the statute though is it? The wording is "used" - not "kept".... not sure who would be responsible out of the keeper or the legal owner should there ever be a lapse of insurance whilst the car was parked on the road and there was an incident involving the vehicle.

As far as I am aware, the definition of "use" can be interpreted differently.

NeverWinter · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:07

rscosworth said:
Ok, Thanks for this guy, another question has arose however.

Is it then ok to keep it on a driveway, uninsured but not declared SORN with valid tax? Someone has advised that to have valid tax there must be valid insurance? The .gov website is very confusing and I can understand how people can misinterpret certain aspects of it.

Thanks

If you're keeping it on the drive why not just SORN it and claim the remaining tax back?

[TW]Fox · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:09

daz said:
That's not the wording of the statute though is it? The wording is "used" - not "kept".... not sure who would be responsible out of the keeper or the legal owner should there ever be a lapse of insurance whilst the car was parked on the road and there was an incident involving the vehicle.

As far as I am aware, the definition of "use" can be interpreted differently.

Can I just clarify - are you trying to suggest you can legally keep an uninsured vehicle on the public highway?

rscosworth · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:27

NeverWinter said:
If you're keeping it on the drive why not just SORN it and claim the remaining tax back?

Because it is only for a couple of weeks.

NeverWinter · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:28

rscosworth said:
Because it is only for a couple of weeks.

Ah I see.

I believe it's legal to be on your drive without insurance.

Jokester · 30 Mar 2010 at 20:36

[TW]Fox;16267445 said:
Can I just clarify - are you trying to suggest you can legally keep an uninsured vehicle on the public highway?

He is right though:-

143 Users of motor vehicles to be insured or secured against third-party risks

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act—

(a) a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act, and

(b) a person must not cause or permit any other person to use a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that other person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act.

(2) If a person acts in contravention of subsection (1) above he is guilty of an offence.

The RTA makes no definition of what "use" means, indeed it doesn't even seem to make any connection between the "user" and "keeper" or "owner".