What a complete cluster - some srious advice needed please

[QUOTE='[TW]Fox;28405313'


Surely somebody who has a car impounded for say parking it like a prat but has an otherwise fine normal insurance policy doesn't need to re-insure it to get it back? :confused:[/QUOTE]

if you'd got it impounded for parking or section 52 etc you'd still be insured
 
ubersonic said:
Considering the fine is his fault I would also be very tempted to claim the car was undamaged when the police took it.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't get very far with that one,and trying to defraud the police probably won't end well.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
No offence to the OP, but I smell BS throughout the story. I don't think I'd believe his son without some corroborating evidence.
Click to expand...

reading between the lines

Friend went on holiday and cancelled the insurance leaving the car uninsured and for the OP's son to sort his own insurance whilst he was using it when friend was abroad.

OP's son never did, and crashed the car with no insurance. Police have now siezed the car leaving him with a bill to get the car repaired, get the car back, buy insurance for it in order to buy it back and pay whatever fine the court hands him for driving with no insurance.

andi said:
Something really odd about this, sorry.

Insurance companies don't just cancel for a bounced payment for a start.
Click to expand...

They will if he doesn't pay enough of the monthly payments and ignores the letters. I'm guessing the son's friend has deliberately not paid because he's abroad. Maybe friend told the son and the son thought **** it I'll get away with it, maybe he didn't tell son and son has genuinely been on the end of a *** move by his friend. Only they will know for definite if he told his friend before he went away that he wasn't intending on keeping up with the policy.

Boycey0211 said:
This x100.

When my insurance got renewed they had my old card details so they didnt take the cash, think I got about a months notice to pay up. They sent me many letters and phonecalls to chase me too, not being arsy just informing me that they hadnt taken payment.
Click to expand...

How long will this go on for before they cut you off if you don't return your calls or letters because you're abroad and/or deliberately ignoring them.

We've seen this loads of time on traffic cops. *****'s buy a monthly policy to get the certificate, then stop paying after the first month and then use the paper certificate to prove they have insurance, even though the policy was cancelled by them due to non payment. Granted in the new electronic database era this won't be as common, but I've definitely seen plenty of cases on traffic cops / motorway cops etc.. where monthly policies were cancelled because the policy holder wasn't keeping up with their payments.
 
Last edited:
~Divine~Wind~ said:
I was told by admiral that they wouldn't insure a car I was not the owner of as I had no Financial interest in the vehicle. So much akin to finance letters advising they have no further interest in the car to protect yourself.
Click to expand...

Admiral (and associated companies) are crap though. My mum's got her own policy with Swiftcover on my old car, which I'm still the registered keeper and owner of, and it says that on the policy. No problems.
 
~Divine~Wind~ said:
I was told by admiral that they wouldn't insure a car I was not the owner of as I had no Financial interest in the vehicle. So much akin to finance letters advising they have no further interest in the car to protect yourself.
Click to expand...

MichaelAwkward said:
Admiral (and associated companies) are crap though. My mum's got her own policy with Swiftcover on my old car, which I'm still the registered keeper and owner of, and it says that on the policy. No problems.
Click to expand...

Exactly... Admiral are one of the worst companies around :)
 
Son is 20 so not a kid anymore!

The damage caused to the car was when he was the named driver on his friends insurance but he did not sort it out at the time I suspect due the £500 excess. Once the friends policy had expired he took out a new policy in his name and for some reason when he got pulled he was not covered. Perhaps he never did take out the policy or as he is not the owner it was not valid I don't know. However, at the end of the day he did not have valid insurance when pulled over. He has spoken to the impound this morning and the charges are ceilinged at £430-a minor positive. He is now waiting to speak to the police to confirm what needs to be in place before he or more likely me turns up for the car.

I am at legoland atm trying to stay sane in some horrendous queues so I can only look at this thread sporadically.

Thanks for the advice so far peeps.
 
it is absolutely terrifying that people like this are given driving licenses.

sorry OP but if your son doesn't understand the basic requirements of right and wrong here then I feel that as a parent you should have done more to enforce this.

I was a complete dumbass when I first passed my test, but my car was my responsibility as was the requirements to have it road legal. At some point when you knew your child was going around in someone elses car, you should have firmly put a stop to all this.

edit, just seen his age.
at 20 years old, this is his problem tbh.
 
Talk to the recovery agent for what is required. They'll be able to tell you as they#ll be dealing with it rather than the police.
 
rjk said:
it is absolutely terrifying that people like this are given driving licenses.

sorry OP but if your son doesn't understand the basic requirements of right and wrong here then I feel that as a parent you should have done more to enforce this.

I was a complete dumbass when I first passed my test, but my car was my responsibility as was the requirements to have it road legal. At some point when you knew your child was going around in someone elses car, you should have firmly put a stop to all this.

edit, just seen his age.
at 20 years old, this is his problem tbh.
Click to expand...

Not very helpful tbh, he is 20 years old, a serving soldier and yes he has always been taught right from wrong. At worst he has made some very bad decisions, some of which were illegal, at best a plank who did not comprehend the mavity of what he was doing but don't put any blame at my feet please.
 
I can only guess that the distance between the OP and his son has made having control that much harder - plus the lad is 20 not 12 so he can make his own decisions right or wrong.

What I would say is that if I were to lend money to my kids to go buy a car I would make sure I have a say in what is purchased - as if it all goes pear-shaped it's me that foots the bill. Lending him money to buy a Cat C car that he promptly grenades wasn't a smart move. Lending him money at all given he can't successfully manage money wasn't smart either.

Probably wouldn't have mentioned he's in the army - can't be relied upon for daily living but given lethal weapons to play with :)

Kids can be complete arses sometimes no matter how well they are brought up.
 
perhaps it isn't helpful, but it is my opinion.

as a parent, a ten minute conversation about how to be a law abiding motorist would have been all it took. knowing your son was driving a vehicle that didn't belong to him should have at least prompted you to offer council?

If he's 20 and a serving soldier, I am sure that he will have the financial flexibility to recover from this situation over time.
 
wesley said:
if the insurance payment bounced then its the owners problem not your son?
Click to expand...

It's the driver's responsibility to ensure the vehicle they drive is correctly insured and the owner's to ensure they aren't permitting a vehicle to be driven without insurance.
 
Clearly not the OP's fault, but not sure why you are bending over backwards to help your son here to the extent that you are going to go get the car back from the pound.

He's 20 and in the army, let him sort it out himself!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom