ask_sodding_MID

stockhausen said:
Accuracy or comprehension not your strong suit . . . or both?

I think that you should go back and read again:
Click to expand...

When in a hole, stop digging.

That may not be what will happen but it certainly says that it could be.
Click to expand...

This such hard work. It says you COULD be fined - because you COULD. Because the reason your car isn't on there could be because you have no insurance, in which case, you could be fined!

If I drive a car with no insurance I could check AskMID, find it not on there, and the warning that I could be fined is totally true.

If I drive a legally insured car which for whatever reason doesn't seem to be on the database, then I will NOT be fined for the cars non-presence on the database.

You don't get fined for not having a car on AskMID, you get fined for not having insurance, therefore your pointless little rant is.. pointless.
 
[TW]Fox;19877345 said:
Long-winded red herring thrown back . . .
Click to expand...
So, I was 100% correct in what I said then?


Meanwhile, back to the original suggestion, "Why don't the DVLA fine the incompetent sodding insurers for providing incomplete and/or incorrect information?"
 
stockhausen said:
So, I was 100% correct in what I said then?


Meanwhile, back to the original suggestion, "Why don't the DVLA fine the incompetent sodding insurers for providing incomplete and/or incorrect information?"
Click to expand...

Why would you get fined if you are insured, regardless of what that site says???
 
jigger said:
Well I thought I was, but please feel free to enlighten me :) Are you saying the Police use the askMID site for vehicle insurance checks?
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware it's the same database used by the automatic police checks. The askMID website is for the public to search that database.

I googled it to check as well though:

Clicky clicky
 
jon.bda said:
Why would you get fined if you are insured, regardless of what that site says???
Click to expand...
Indeed. On the other hand, Why don't the DVLA fine the incompetent sodding insurers for providing incomplete and/or incorrect information?


[TW]Fox;19877415 said:
You clearly thought the fine was for non-appearance on AskMID - otherwise why suggest the insurer was fined as an alternative?
Click to expand...
That may be what you thought I thought, it isn't what I wrote so perhaps mind-reading isn't your strong suit either.

Incidentally, where exactly did I suggest that the insurer should be fined as an "alternative"?


ps - "When in a hole, stop digging." :p
 
Pudney said:
As far as I'm aware it's the same database used by the automatic police checks. The askMID website is for the public to search that database.

I googled it to check as well though:

Clicky clicky
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure that the Police do use the same system, but I think my point still stands either way doesn't it?

If the car is not on the *system* for any reason, you will more than likely be unfairly prosecuted and have very little in the way of recourse.
 
*sigh* you wont be charged if your insurer isnt doing it right, as long as youve done your best to make sure its legal thats fine.

Im using aviva mine shows fine?
 
stockhausen said:
Why don't the DVLA fine the incompetent sodding insurers for providing incomplete and/or incorrect information?
Click to expand...

Because the fine isn't for not keeping the database up to date, it's for having an uninsured car.

An uninsured car will not be on the database so you could be fined if your car is not on there, as this could be due to it being uninsured.

It could also be missing due to a clerical error, in which you would not be fined.

That's why it says 'could' and not 'will'. If it was actually a fine for just not being on there, you would get fined regardless.
 
The reason there is no punishment on the insurers for not keeping the MID upto date is that it's not a legally binding site. The important part is that YOU (if you are a driver) have upto date and valid insurance.

IF you go onto askMID and do a search and your car does not come up as insured, it is WARNING you that you might end up fined, as it is assuming that some who search on there are not insured. It is THOSE people who are breaking the law.

To summarise: If you have valid car insurance and can prove it with a cover note, you have nothing to worry about.
 
dfarrall said:
*sigh* you wont be charged if your insurer isnt doing it right, as long as youve done your best to make sure its legal thats fine.

Im using aviva mine shows fine?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that's not always the way the current system works. I know for a fact a woman had a insured Merc taken from her and impounded as it wrongfully showed no insurance on the Police system.

She was also reported for driving with no insurance and left at the side of the road with two young children to boot.

I would feel like swinging for someone if that to happened to my family. The current system is just all kinds of wrong.
 
She didn't have any proof of insurance or ability to contact her insurance company?

Would have easily sorted that issue with minimal hassle.
 
Sadly Jigger has raised a valid point.

That for the police the MID = all.

If your car isn't on it, then its not insured. If you insist it is insured, then its not on MID because you canceled the policy, stopped making regular monthly payments, or some other step which caused the policy to cease to exist.

The idea that the MID could in fact be wrong (because it so rarely is) means that sometimes, perfectly innocent people can end up having their cars seized for no insurance.

They do not have to appear in court, they do not get fined or prosecuted.

But you do end up landed with the recovery and impound costs :(
 
MrLOL said:
Sadly Jigger has raised a valid point.

That for the police the MID = all.

If your car isn't on it, then its not insured. If you insist it is insured, then its not on MID because you canceled the policy, stopped making regular monthly payments, or some other step which caused the policy to cease to exist.

The idea that the MID could in fact be wrong (because it so rarely is) means that sometimes, perfectly innocent people can end up having their cars seized for no insurance.

They do not have to appear in court, they do not get fined or prosecuted.

But you do end up landed with the recovery and impound costs :(
Click to expand...

I was watching Road Wars/Traffic Cops or whatever you call it this week and there was a chap who flagged up as uninsured on the ANPR. The police officer called the insurer who confirmed it was insured (there had been a typo on the certificate that caused the issue in this particular case) and the man was sent on his way. So what you have said doesn't ring true.
 
MrLOL said:
Sadly Jigger has raised a valid point.

That for the police the MID = all.

If your car isn't on it, then its not insured. If you insist it is insured, then its not on MID because you canceled the policy, stopped making regular monthly payments, or some other step which caused the policy to cease to exist.

The idea that the MID could in fact be wrong (because it so rarely is) means that sometimes, perfectly innocent people can end up having their cars seized for no insurance.

They do not have to appear in court, they do not get fined or prosecuted.

But you do end up landed with the recovery and impound costs :(
Click to expand...

That would be very very rare, the only reason would be you can't remember what insurance company you are with.

99% of the time the police will phone your insurance company at the road side if you insist your insured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom