Car Insurance & SORN

[twpsaesneg]

Mod Note: Posts #1 - #9 originally in this thread.

Going off topic so apologies for that, but do the police still do producers for driving licenses? I assumed that these days they could check at the roadside via the DVLA whether you had a license? I thought that for tax/VED, insurance and license they can call the relevant people and validate rather quickly.

Yes, mainly used if PNC is down or for something that can't be checked easily at the roadside such as CBT certificates for motorcycles etc.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Yes, mainly used if PNC is down or for something that can't be checked easily at the roadside such as CBT certificates for motorcycles etc.

They also operate a system of checking, without stooping the car, whether it is insured. Which is curious when you consider that there is no legal requirement to insure a car.

 

[twpsaesneg]

They also operate a system of checking, without stooping the car, whether it is insured. Which is curious when you consider that there is no legal requirement to insure a car.

Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act would suggest otherwise.

There is also now a requirement to insure any vehicle on a public road regardless of whether it's moving or not, which was brought in reasonably recently, previously it was purely S143 - i.e. car being used.

However this is wildly off topic

 

[londonbridge]

The driving licence thing works because it has your name and photo.

Er, no. Since I've never had any reason to reapply for or have it reissued (ie I've never had a driving ban or changed my name/address), I still have my paper driving licence with no photo. Unless of course my circumstances change, I'm not likely to have a photocard one until I need to renew it when I'm 70.

 

[PeterC]

They also operate a system of checking, without stooping the car, whether it is insured. Which is curious when you consider that there is no legal requirement to insure a car.

All cars on the road must be insured (not sure what the situation for cars with SORNs is now). An "any vehicle" clause in your policy allows you to drive any insured car for which you are not a named driver.

Of course the ANPR checks do not verify that the person behind the wheel is covered for driving that car.

 

[ainsworth74]

(not sure what the situation for cars with SORNs is now)

I don't believe it has changed. As long as they're off the road (i.e. on a drive, in a garage or on private land) then no insurance (or tax) is due.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I don't believe it has changed. As long as they're off the road (i.e. on a drive, in a garage or on private land) then no insurance (or tax) is due.

It's not just whether they're off the public highway, it's whether they are off the publicly accessible highway. A drive is a bit of a grey area but for example you would need insurance to have your car parked in a supermarket car park.

 

[Haywain]

A drive is a bit of a grey area but for example you would need insurance to have your car parked in a supermarket car park.

Nothing grey about it at all. It's off the public highway and doesn't need to be insured. And I believe that you are wrong about supermarket car parks - the supermarket may feel you need insurance, but the requirement will arise from the restriction of only being permitted to stay for a very limited time.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Er, no. Since I've never had any reason to reapply for or have it reissued (ie I've never had a driving ban or changed my name/address), I still have my paper driving licence with no photo. Unless of course my circumstances change, I'm not likely to have a photocard one until I need to renew it when I'm 70.

All cars on the road must be insured (not sure what the situation for cars with SORNs is now). An "any vehicle" clause in your policy allows you to drive any insured car for which you are not a named driver.

Of course the ANPR checks do not verify that the person behind the wheel is covered for driving that car.

Exactly. It is the driver who has to be insured. Any third party claim will be made against the driver not the car But there is no obligation to insure the car. All the ANPR checks tell the police is that some has insurance when driving that vehicle. OTHO it is possible. albeit expensive, to write a policy that allows an individual to drive any car. A car driven by that person might not appear on the ANPR check.

Any vehicle which has not had a SORN issued must be taxed and someone must be insured to drive it., even if it is locked in your garage. That was introduced to deal with the problem of people, usually classic car owners, taking a quick spin in a vehicle which is not documented

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Nothing grey about it at all. It's off the public highway and doesn't need to be insured. And I believe that you are wrong about supermarket car parks - the supermarket may feel you need insurance, but the requirement will arise from the restriction of only being permitted to stay for a very limited time.

I think the explanatory notes to The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 2000 make clear the situation - in 1998 the House of Lords (the forerunner to today's Supreme Court) ruled that a car park did not fall under the category of a highway or road. This is in relation to Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, which mandated having insurance when a car is driven on a "road" (which was further defined in Section 192(1) of the RTA as, in relation to England and Wales, "any highway or other road to which the public has access").

Therefore, to ensure that the UK was compliant with EEC Directive 72/166 (which effectively required that all member states mandate insurance when a vehicle is driven in a public place), the above Regulations were made, making clear that the insurance mandate applies to any public highway (whether publicly or privately owned), as well as any "public place", which is specifically said to include car parks.

So clearly insurance is required if a vehicle is to be driven in a public place, and a public place includes a car park (this is quite apart from the obligation to insure unSORNed vehicles). If someone's drive is particularly large, or perhaps is used to access other properties, then there may be an argument to say that it constitutes a public place and that therefore no vehicle can be driven on or off that drive without insurance (I'm not au fait with the situation regarding SORNing such a vehicle).

 

[Llanigraham]

Exactly. It is the driver who has to be insured. Any third party claim will be made against the driver not the car But there is no obligation to insure the car. All the ANPR checks tell the police is that some has insurance when driving that vehicle. OTHO it is possible. albeit expensive, to write a policy that allows an individual to drive any car. A car driven by that person might not appear on the ANPR check.

Any vehicle which has not had a SORN issued must be taxed and someone must be insured to drive it., even if it is locked in your garage. That was introduced to deal with the problem of people, usually classic car owners, taking a quick spin in a vehicle which is not documented

Totally incorrect.
It is the vehicle that is insured. The name/names of the drivers is subsiduary to that.

 

[Edders23]

An example of an idiot taking the mickey occured in yorkshire recently when police attended an RTA and an uber was called to pick the passengers up the uber had been SORN and the driver was done for no tax MOT or insurance

 

[Bletchleyite]

Totally incorrect.
It is the vehicle that is insured. The name/names of the drivers is subsiduary to that.

Indeed, the vehicle has to be insured as well, as otherwise it is uninsured and therefore illegal as soon as the driver locks it and walks away from it. This is I understand why the "third party exemption" requires the car to also be covered by a policy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly. It is the driver who has to be insured. Any third party claim will be made against the driver not the car But there is no obligation to insure the car. All the ANPR checks tell the police is that some has insurance when driving that vehicle. OTHO it is possible. albeit expensive, to write a policy that allows an individual to drive any car.

Almost everyone who is the main driver on a private car[1] and aged over 25 has such a policy, so it doesn't cost that much. But the problem arises when they walk away from a car they are driving under this clause - it has to still be insured then.

[1] I have a Land Rover which is technically a commercial vehicle and is therefore on a van policy and don't have this - you normally don't get it with van policies, just car ones.