Six miles is walkable even in bad weather. Some people spend 3 hours per day in the car. I'd rather walk provided its not snowing. Get on yer bike!6 miles is cycleable.
Six miles is walkable even in bad weather. Some people spend 3 hours per day in the car. I'd rather walk provided its not snowing. Get on yer bike!6 miles is cycleable.
[TW]Fox said:You are pretty much stuffed. You drove a car with no insurance - it is YOUR responsbility to check you are insured.
well probably, but that's not the point.!bluetonic! said:I'm agreeing with Mr Fox all the way.
If this incident was in Swindon and you had hit my Vauxhall Corsa SXI 1.7 dti without insurance, do you think you'd have the change in your pockets to pay for the damages?..well probably, but that's not the point.
You broke the law. If you are ever hit by an unisured driver, let us know how it pans out.
Fensta said:Crud.
How is his mate meant to know if the driver of his car has DOC or not? He is obliged (within his own right) to check the document, but has no legal requirement to do so.
stoofa said:How sure on this are you?
There is an offence "allowing an uninsured driver to drive your motor vehicle" or similar.
I would fully expect the owner of the vehicle to be in trouble over this as well.
stoofa said:How sure on this are you?
There is an offence "allowing an uninsured driver to drive your motor vehicle" or similar.
I would fully expect the owner of the vehicle to be in trouble over this as well.
Fensta said:The owner of the vehicle in my friends case was in the vehice. Basically, an accident occured which was actually non fault. My friend was driving his girlfriends car (with her in it) when the accident occured. The road was closed, police called, all parties were ok.
Police gave a producer to my friend. He wne to show his documents at station, she said, your not insured to drive this car, he went "what", matter esculated. He got done, nothing happened to girlfriend (owner of car).
I'm very sure, there is no legal requirement for the owner to check a drivers claim that they have DOC, therefore, in most cases, I guess it is likely the owner of the car will not be prosecuted.
Samtheman1k said:It seems a bit harsh. Ok, you were breaking the law and need to be punished. But making you lose your new job over it is stupid IMO, what you going to do now? Start claiming the dole? If the judge is sensible, he'll see that you' re not a repeat offender and he'll give you 5points to allow you to keep your job...but then again...
Samtheman1k said:EDIT: just read that it's only 6 miles to your work. Get on your bike!
andy2k said:I did the same thing, and she is my girlfriend![]()
What exactly happened in this case then?
laissez-faire said:Am I the only one who finds the whole insurance issue a bit stupid?
I mean suppose I didn't have insurance, I would still be liable for third party damage so I think the fact the law forbids persons from accepting the liability themselves to be against human rights. As far as I am concerned if I have available to me the disposable income to cover the costs of any damage I cause why should I be forced to have insurance? Why are cars so different to anything else? I could easily cause a lot of damage with many things I own... but I don't have to insure those.
When arguing this point before I usually get told it is because those without insurance tend to be financially pushed and probably wouldn't be able to produce 200k if they destroyed a Ferrari.... fair enough point but what about those who could and wish to take the chance?
Fensta said:It was never even mentioned. Not by the police or anyone. He went to court, they banned him for 21 days, and fined him £35. Nothing happened to his girlfriend. She had been feeling really poorly. For her to drive would have been madness and most likely cause an accident. She gave him permission to drive, both of them blisfully unaware that in actual fact he did not have DOC. his policy had no exclusion to say he could or could not drive another car. He was however, 25 and had had DOC with his previous years insurer. Through a broker, they changed his insurance company (sabre or something) and the policy did not continue like for like.
Hope that hjelps
Fortunatel, he was due to go to France for the duration of the ban on holiday. He is perfectly entitled to drive his car over there and be covered by his insurance regardless of a UK ban. Suffice to say, they both made sure they had DOC after that
andy2k said:Finally when was this?
I've heard in the last year or so they have started to come down heavy on this stuff.
Cheers for your reply, really helps me.
Fensta said:July 2004, went to court November 2004. May have changed, but I really don't think so. If your GF gets a summons then she gets a summons. Seems kinda harsh.
andy2k said:I know what you mean. She would hate court.
When i go, i will explain i thought i was covered, and that she was unfit to drive etc. She doesnt need to go with me no?
I want to keep her out of it, i told the officer its 100% my fault, and that i will take all of it, as i don't want her involved.
Fensta said:If she has handed over no information, then she cant be summoned. They may want to see her subsequently, but this unlikely.
It's hardly practical though if you're in a job where you have to wear a suit and/or have meetings, need to carry a briefcase or other materials.Trickle said:Six miles is walkable even in bad weather. Some people spend 3 hours per day in the car. I'd rather walk provided its not snowing. Get on yer bike!