New proposals muted.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345680/Uninsured-cars-crushed-shake-aimed-motoring-underclass.html
I think it will cause rise in VIN tampering.
Also, how it will tackle drivers driving a car showing insured in MID but he is not actually eligible for driving that car?
|
That is the opposite to the link article which says "must be insured unless SORN".
Quote -
"Unless the registered owner has filled out a Statutory Off Road Declaration (SORN) form, which declares the vehicle is off the road, the new penalties will come into force".
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 10 Jan 11 at 10:49
|
>> Even SORN cars needs to be insured! >>
NOT true.
|
The news is bit conflicting.
It says "Under the new laws, it will be an offence to keep an uninsured vehicle - even if it is not being driven."
But also says insurance not required if declared SORN.
But if you read readers' comments, you will see lot of people are shouting against the proposal as they are claiming it will force them to insure even if the car is not driven and SORNed.
Somone also said it is the norm in Spain.
And uninsured cars are supposed to be crushed anyway - so what's new about it?
PS: My thread title should have been better - apologies.
Last edited by: movilogo on Mon 10 Jan 11 at 10:58
|
|
Minister was on the radio this morning. Less than convincing defence to claims that real problem was cars not properly registered but quite clear that SORN = no need to insure.
|
Exactly as I got it, Bromptonaut.
The ultimate sanction is crushing. I wonder why - cars could be confiscated and auctioned for the public purse.
|
Section 22 Road Safety Act 2006 deals with this matter and has been waiting 5 years for the commencement Order to bring it into law.
As yet I have yet to see the promised regulation that spells it all out but by the various smoke signals I have seen it appears that this is imminent.......look out for March 2011.
What I understand will be a system similar to the continuous registration as required re Excise Licence, i.e. either it is Licensed or on SORN.
Regarding Insurance it will either be insured or a declaration that it is not insured and being kept off the road. If neither apply then nasty men with tow trucks will impound and crush.
dvd
Last edited by: Dwight Van Driver on Mon 10 Jan 11 at 14:14
|
Given that there are processes to avoid any problems with this issue ( to SORN a car isnt rocket science ) anyone who does get caught is a fool.
There should certainly be a period of grace after the tax runs out just incase the system fails, maybe two months, but after that, crush em.
|
short sighted looking stu
stand away from the ball re-asses and give your statement again
trust me you are SO wrong if you believe dvla are perfect,vosa are perfect,your insurers are perfect,the mid is perfect
|
As ever, the problem will be the various databases speed (or lack of) that will lead to genuine mistakes being made and cars crushed when they shouldn't have been.
I have been pulled over by ANPR when driving perfectly legally - because DVLA hadn't taken the 'no recorded keeper' flag off the car I had bought, sent notification on, and was driving. I had the green slip, of course, to prove I was legit.
|
Just saw a bit of a repeat of Essex police stopping a van with a marker on the BiB computer system. It was the genuine vehicle for which " a flag " had been applied.
The driver was aware that his reg had been cloned and fortunately had a DVLA letter stating this.
Saving his a towing fee etc.
|
|
I'd like to see contractors for DVLA taking away and crushing an uninsured car that's kept off the road - trespass and all that. Better still in a locked garage.
Last edited by: Dulwich Estate on Mon 10 Jan 11 at 19:33
|
|
I was wondering how they'd get round that problem DU. Probably just impose a fine.
|
Just re-inforces my policy of keeping all my SORN and Change of owner acknowledgments from the DVLA on file.
I get several SORNs a year and only shred them when a replacement comes in for the next period.
I make a point of SORNing on line and keep the DVLA email on until the paper one comes.
Self-preserrvation.
Ted
|
Mt daughter, the one that's just bought the Puma, has taken her Audi off the road and has no intention of driving it again.
It's stood on her property waiting for someone to buy it.
But, it's taxed 'til the end of June and has a long MOT. It's not insured however but she's keeping it taxed as it's easier to get rid of.
Where does this leave her ? Can she declare SORN while it's taxed, I don't see why not.
Or will she wait until an ' Insurance ' SORN comes from the DVLA.
I hadn't realised the new regs had come in so soon.
Ted
Last edited by: Ted on Mon 28 Feb 11 at 16:09
|
According to the Regs then she should SORN under Continous Insurance requirements.
Not sure when faced with this at DVLA, i.e. a tax in force, whether or not they will send a refund.
dvd
|
>> According to the Regs then she should SORN under Continous Insurance requirements.
>> Not sure when faced with this at DVLA, i.e. a tax in force, whether or
>> not they will send a refund.
>> dvd
Thanks, Dwite....I'll ring, or better still, call in at the DVLA this week. We actually want to keep the car taxed as it's easier to sell like that.
I can't see that they could force you to surrender the tax just'cos you're not using the car.
Ted
>>
|
>>>The change in the law means that you won't be able to temporarily take a vehicle off the road and cancel your insurance, unless you make the vehicle SORN at the same time.
Above from the gov website. As far as I know when you declare SORN if there is VED remaining you get the full remaining months paid back to you automatically.
I was faced with just the same situation the week the regs came in force... I made sure I sold the car and had it collected before the rules started.
|
|
As usual, this will affect ordinary law-abiding folk more than the scroats it is presumably aimed at. If 'their' car gets crushed, they'll just nick another from the OLAF!
Last edited by: J Bonington Jagworth on Tue 1 Mar 11 at 12:29
|
Laws never affect those who break them, unless they get caught.
They will have less chance of getting caught, because more coppers get the elbow, due to enforcement by default..
|
I cannot think of any occasion on my near 30yr driving history where this change would have affected me.
|
>>>I cannot think of any occasion on my near 30yr driving history where this change would have affected me.
No... I can't think it would have affected things for me with my own cars. Might have caused some issues now and again where I've sold cars for folks.... keeping them here after the owner had transferred their insurance to a new car.
Happy to keep within the new law though. It may not help with the hardened crims but I think it will help catch loads of the middle ground folks who would take a chance for a few days/weeks when swapping/selling cars.
|
I called in at the DVLA office today and found it not to be busy so I had a chat with one of their nice advisers.
When I mentioned our problem he said he'd been dreading anyone asking about insurance sorning as nobody there had been told anything about it. After a short wait, he managed to find something on the web and printed me a copy off.
Most of it's about driving without insurance and the problems there.
There was some information on insurance sorning. In short. you have to SORN a car when no insurance is in force. It does not mention being able to SORN a taxed car. It seems the only way you can declare Sorn is on your tax renewal or on a tax surrender form.
We do not want to renew or surrender, we want to keep the tax but not use the car...awaiting a buyer. To me, this seems a perfectly legal situation.
" The Road Safety Act became law in Nov. 2006 and introduced a new offence which is aimed at overcoming the problem of vehicles not specifically covered by any insurance policy ( even a blanket policy ) being used by drivers who claim cover under their ' driving other vehicles ' extension. The requirement for insurance will apply to all vehicles, being driven or not. "
It would seem, from this, that a legal situation, eg. Me driving my daughter's uninsured car from her drive to mine, without stopping on the way, under my entitlement to drive vehicles not belonging to me has, or will, become illegal.
I suggested to theDVLA lad that this wasn't going to have any effect on your regular uninsured driver and he agreed. It just seems to be introducing another bit of statute to earn more revenue without even knowing if the car's being used.
I suggested if this was the road they were going down then why mot have a simple form where you could just declare SORN for1 or all of 3 reasons, Tax/Mot/ Insurace, ticking one or all boxes as appropriate......with no requirement to surrender the RFL. He thought that was a better idea as well !
He thought the system would come in around the beginning of June, although DVD says it's already with us.
We hope to have sold the car ,with it's RFL, long before then.
Ted
|
>> We do not want to renew or surrender, we want to keep the tax but
>> not use the car...awaiting a buyer. To me, this seems a perfectly legal situation.
And a common situation.
Pity that this Government seems to be determined to make life a difficult as possible.
Also a pity, that some people on this forum, seem to believe that no one could ever really be in this situation.
|
The purpose of this law is to be able to deal with uninsured cars that are not being driven at the time they are noted to be uninsured, eg. when parked outside Mr Scrote's residence.
In the past, unless someone was behind the wheel, the cops couldn't do anything.
|
>>>Also a pity, that some people on this forum, seem to believe that no one could ever really be in this situation.
It's not that no-one will ever be in this situation but that the majority of folks doing a standard trade in deal will never be affected and those that are affected are often the risk takers.
With those like Ted, and my similar recent situation as I mentioned above, then there is no reason why we shouldn't make more effort to get the insurance co to extend insurance on the old car for 30 days while a sale is arranged.... usually not too costlyand what we did with my own last change.
After all anyone who keeps a car for a couple of weeks to sell on after a swap who hasn't made arrangements can't legally take it on the road to demo... but they do don't they.
There's a family of scrotes not too far from here who keep a couple of uninsured *pool* cars parked out on the street for night use. They are crafty making sure they are taxed but I hope this law will make things harder for them.
|
"then there is no reason why we shouldn't make more effort to get the insurance co to extend insurance on the old car for 30 days while a sale is arranged.... usually not too costlyand what we did with my own last change."
A very good point - I think most insurers will do this for a reasonable amount and you need to remember that just because your car is not on the public road it can still be damaged, or indeed cause injury to others if you move it about so probably not a good idea to have no insurance on it anyway.
|
>> >> "then there is no reason why we shouldn't make more effort to get the insurance
>> >> co to extend insurance on the old car for 30 days while a sale is
>> >> arranged.... usually not too costlyand what we did with my own last change."
>>
>> A very good point - I think most insurers will do this for a reasonable
>> amount and you need to remember that just because your car is not on the
>> public road it can still be damaged, or indeed cause injury to others if you
>> move it about so probably not a good idea to have no insurance on it
>> anyway.
It's not a good point. As in another recent thread, why the hell should the lawful majority have to pay extra and jump through hoops due to a law poorly and stupidly designed to prevent people breaking another law which the lawful majority would not have broken anyway.
|
Car on road - needs insured/taxed.
Car not on road - needs insured/taxed or SORNed.
Car is on road and not on insurer database - start the ball rolling towards cubing the car, whether or not someone is inside it.
I'm failing to see the ambiguity.
|
" why the hell should the lawful majority have to pay extra and jump through hoop"
1 'You don't have to pay extra' - just SORN your car if you don't wan't
to to keep in Insured
2 'Jump through hoop' - takes two minutes to complete on-line SORN declaration
Storm in a teacup
|
>> Storm in a teacup
>>
Agreed. Same as the Luddites on the idling engines, stop-start load on batteries thread.
|
>> OP NOT true.
>>
That was established within the first few replies.
|
Even SORN cars needs to be insured! - Old Navy
