backwardben Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 you're nicked sunshine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahad_uk81 Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Save money on solicitor fees Go down the station ... explain your self with bank statement showes money left your account and from your point of view it was all correct. If they didn't accept, fill the paper for court then get a itemised bill for your phone that you call the insurance to add your self as a driver or browser history showed the day you have have been on their website which matches the payment date. If you need further help, message me and I try to help you ... FREE Court for driving isn't that serious so dnt be afraid... judges are nice ... just dnt EVER lie about anything to them Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Save money on solicitor fees Go down the station ... explain your self with bank statement showes money left your account and from your point of view it was all correct. If they didn't accept, fill the paper for court then get a itemised bill for your phone that you call the insurance to add your self as a driver or browser history showed the day you have have been on their website which matches the payment date. If you need further help, message me and I try to help you ... FREE Court for driving isn't that serious so dnt be afraid... judges are nice ... just dnt EVER lie about anything to them Good luck I am no expert in this field but surely it is not as simple as that. A bank statement showing money being paid to X company could be for anything. It does not necessarily confirm that the money was for the specific policy on that specific vehicle. Similarly, the phone number record or web history, again, that could be for anything. Someone could ring up and ask the time for all the court is aware. Unless the OP is able to get a copy of the call recording or a legally certified transcript I just cannot see that being enough. If I have read the OP correctly, the alleged offence is driving without insurance. The only real defence to that surely is producing a copy of the valid insurance certificate. That’s why the statutes have two offences for driving without insurance and a second one for failure to produce an insurance certificate. I would suggest the OP still seeks legal advice. The magistrates may well be “friendly” and less formal than a higher court of law, but it is still a court and they will be bound by the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahad_uk81 Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 You are right, won't be as simple as that ... however if he can link that payment to which change to policy then i think he might have a leg to stand on and if judge is nice course, for sure he should of waited to get some sort of written confirmation (email or letter) before driving ... beside that least he can do is what we mentioned... just has to bare in mind if they find him guilty .. he could face bigger fine (mony only) for court costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidley Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 would it not be better getter a statement from the insurer, detailing all his activity, surly they would have all the details of his activity trying to get insured, and the reason for his failure, which would all tie up with every thing els? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahad_uk81 Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Kidley has got a point ... if insurance company is willing to give you a log of activity then definitely very very helpful... maybe even ask your policyholders to write a sworn statement to give you permission to add you as a second driver. Or come to court as a witnesse with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 So a named not main driver who needs to drive the car within hours of insuring it and the insurance goes through an hour after being stopped, absolute piffle. Based on what? Fairly sure he can show the time the payment was taken from his account which answers that pretty conclusively. Also, OP for any offence to have been committed you or a 'normal' person would have to believe they were knew what they doing and that is was wrong, guilty act, guilty mind. Therefore if you can demonstrate that you absolutely thought you had insurance and there was nothing to indicate otherwise and a 'normal' person faced with the same circumstances would also believe they held insurance, then you will face no charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) Based on what? Fairly sure he can show the time the payment was taken from his account which answers that pretty conclusively. Also, OP for any offence to have been committed you or a 'normal' person would have to believe they were knew what they doing and that is was wrong, guilty act, guilty mind. Therefore if you can demonstrate that you absolutely thought you had insurance and there was nothing to indicate otherwise and a 'normal' person faced with the same circumstances would also believe they held insurance, then you will face no charges. You can't sadly - insurance is an offence of strict liability so you cannot use the lack of mens rea as a defence. https://www.themotoringlaw.uk/offence/driving-without-insurance/ "The only defence available is where you can prove that the vehicle did not belong to you, that it was not hired or loaned to you; OR that you were using the vehicle in the course of your employment and that you neither knew, nor had any reasons to believe, that there was no policy of insurance in force." Edited March 13, 2017 by Obelix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 You can't sadly - insurance is an offence of strict liability so you cannot use the lack of mens rea as a defence. https://www.themotoringlaw.uk/offence/driving-without-insurance/ "The only defence available is where you can prove that the vehicle did not belong to you, that it was not hired or loaned to you; OR that you were using the vehicle in the course of your employment and that you neither knew, nor had any reasons to believe, that there was no policy of insurance in force." Really? Oh apologies. That sucks and sorry for the incorrect advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 IT does seem rather mean when someones done everything correct and the insurers screw up - its still your fault.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now