Starmer & Lammy A Marriage Made In...
News0 min ago
Driving With No Insurance Charge
Hi
I have today had a court summons for driving with no insurance. This offence is said to have happened in January 2018, when I, in fact, sold the vehicle in October 2017 (to a scrap merchants so I’d be surprised if the vehicle was even on the road) I know realise that, although I sent the paperwork to the dvla, unless they send an acknowledgment back then they claim they never received it and so the vehicle was still registered to me. I have been driving for 16 years and never had any motoring offences and still have a copy of my receipt from the scrap merchants and a copy of my certificate of insurance for my new vehicle to prove I was insured on another vehicle at the time of the offence. The court date is just 2 weeks before I am due to give birth, so I would really do without the stress. Does anyone know what could happen in court? Thanks in advance
I have today had a court summons for driving with no insurance. This offence is said to have happened in January 2018, when I, in fact, sold the vehicle in October 2017 (to a scrap merchants so I’d be surprised if the vehicle was even on the road) I know realise that, although I sent the paperwork to the dvla, unless they send an acknowledgment back then they claim they never received it and so the vehicle was still registered to me. I have been driving for 16 years and never had any motoring offences and still have a copy of my receipt from the scrap merchants and a copy of my certificate of insurance for my new vehicle to prove I was insured on another vehicle at the time of the offence. The court date is just 2 weeks before I am due to give birth, so I would really do without the stress. Does anyone know what could happen in court? Thanks in advance
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lylou210. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Thanks, I had already received a letter from the court with their intention to prosecute and at that point I sent off all this info (due date, and proof) and they have still come back to me today with a summons. It was all sent special delivery and was signed for I know they have it, but they’ve still decided to take it to court
Have you been charged with driving with No Insurance (Minimum 6 points) or "Keeping" a vehicle with No Insurance (No points).
It's hard to see what evidence there is of you driving without insurance if you did not have possession of the vehicle at that time.
Let me know which it is and I'll let you know what might happen in court.
It's hard to see what evidence there is of you driving without insurance if you did not have possession of the vehicle at that time.
Let me know which it is and I'll let you know what might happen in court.
Hi,
The letter says
On 25/1/18, you were the person whose name a vehicle was registered under the vehicle excise and regulation act 1994 when it did not meet the insurance requirements of section 144a of the road traffic act 1988 contrary to section 144a of the road traffic act 1988 and schedule 2 to the road traffic offenders act 1988.
I had already sent off my receipt from the scrap merchants and a copy of my (valid) insurance for my new vehicle, as well as an explanation of the situation, but received this summons today.
The letter says
On 25/1/18, you were the person whose name a vehicle was registered under the vehicle excise and regulation act 1994 when it did not meet the insurance requirements of section 144a of the road traffic act 1988 contrary to section 144a of the road traffic act 1988 and schedule 2 to the road traffic offenders act 1988.
I had already sent off my receipt from the scrap merchants and a copy of my (valid) insurance for my new vehicle, as well as an explanation of the situation, but received this summons today.
A couple of preliminaries:
There is no point in contacting the court. The matter has been listed for a hearing and will only be resolved by one. You will only speak to a court receptionist anyway who is not qualified to offer advice or authorised to take any action.
Were you issued with a warning letter or offered a fixed penalty to deal with this matter before the notice of court action? Is the notice you have received a “summons” (very unusual these days for motoring offences), a postal requisition or a Single Justice Procedure Notice? Does it give you the option to enter a plea (this is important)?
To the matter itself. So the less serious of the two alternatives, as I suspected. Having said that (in your circumstances at least) the more difficult to provide a defence. Section 144a says this:
"If a motor vehicle registered under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 does not meet the insurance requirements, the person in whose name the vehicle is registered is guilty of an offence."
It then goes on to define what "meeting the insurance requirements" means. That should not concern us here unless your new policy covers "any vehicle owned by the policyholder". This is most unlikely as such policies are rare these days and even then you will have difficulty because the vehicle was no longer owned by you.
I think you realise that you are in a difficult position because, as far as the law goes, you were still the Registered Keeper. However, there is an "escape clause" which may be available to you. Section 144B provides exceptions to Section 144A. Among those exceptions is this:
144B (1) A person (“the registered keeper”) in whose name a vehicle which does not meet the insurance requirements is registered at any particular time (“ the relevant time ”) does not commit an offence under section 144A of this Act at that time if any of the following conditions are satisfied.
144B (2) Not relevant
144B (3) Not relevant
144B (4)The third condition is that the registered keeper—
(a) is not at the relevant time the person keeping the vehicle, and
(b) if previously he was the person keeping the vehicle, he has by the relevant time complied with any requirements under subsection (7)(a) below that he is required to have complied with by the relevant or any earlier time.
You were not the "person keeping the vehicle" (which is different to the "Registered Keeper") at the relevant time and you can easily show that. I believe (b) and the reference to Section 7a relates to your obligation to inform the DVLA that you had disposed of the vehicle which is where it gets tricky. The conclusion of Section 144B says this:
"A person accused of an offence under section 144A of this Act is not entitled to the benefit of an exception conferred by or under this section unless evidence is adduced that is sufficient to raise an issue with respect to that exception; but where evidence is so adduced it is for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the exception does not apply."
I believe that if you can produce evidence to show that you had complied with your obligation to inform the DVLA - even though you received no acknowledgement - it will be for the prosecution to prove, beyond reasonable doubt (a high bar to clear), that you did not. I'll check into this further and come back, but it may not be until tomorrow or Thursday.
There is no point in contacting the court. The matter has been listed for a hearing and will only be resolved by one. You will only speak to a court receptionist anyway who is not qualified to offer advice or authorised to take any action.
Were you issued with a warning letter or offered a fixed penalty to deal with this matter before the notice of court action? Is the notice you have received a “summons” (very unusual these days for motoring offences), a postal requisition or a Single Justice Procedure Notice? Does it give you the option to enter a plea (this is important)?
To the matter itself. So the less serious of the two alternatives, as I suspected. Having said that (in your circumstances at least) the more difficult to provide a defence. Section 144a says this:
"If a motor vehicle registered under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 does not meet the insurance requirements, the person in whose name the vehicle is registered is guilty of an offence."
It then goes on to define what "meeting the insurance requirements" means. That should not concern us here unless your new policy covers "any vehicle owned by the policyholder". This is most unlikely as such policies are rare these days and even then you will have difficulty because the vehicle was no longer owned by you.
I think you realise that you are in a difficult position because, as far as the law goes, you were still the Registered Keeper. However, there is an "escape clause" which may be available to you. Section 144B provides exceptions to Section 144A. Among those exceptions is this:
144B (1) A person (“the registered keeper”) in whose name a vehicle which does not meet the insurance requirements is registered at any particular time (“ the relevant time ”) does not commit an offence under section 144A of this Act at that time if any of the following conditions are satisfied.
144B (2) Not relevant
144B (3) Not relevant
144B (4)The third condition is that the registered keeper—
(a) is not at the relevant time the person keeping the vehicle, and
(b) if previously he was the person keeping the vehicle, he has by the relevant time complied with any requirements under subsection (7)(a) below that he is required to have complied with by the relevant or any earlier time.
You were not the "person keeping the vehicle" (which is different to the "Registered Keeper") at the relevant time and you can easily show that. I believe (b) and the reference to Section 7a relates to your obligation to inform the DVLA that you had disposed of the vehicle which is where it gets tricky. The conclusion of Section 144B says this:
"A person accused of an offence under section 144A of this Act is not entitled to the benefit of an exception conferred by or under this section unless evidence is adduced that is sufficient to raise an issue with respect to that exception; but where evidence is so adduced it is for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the exception does not apply."
I believe that if you can produce evidence to show that you had complied with your obligation to inform the DVLA - even though you received no acknowledgement - it will be for the prosecution to prove, beyond reasonable doubt (a high bar to clear), that you did not. I'll check into this further and come back, but it may not be until tomorrow or Thursday.
It’s a summons of referral to court. I did not receive any penalty notices, but then I had since moved house and the summons was sent on to me as was opened by new occupier of house. I don’t have any proof I sent off the v5... I popped it in the post and forgot about it (believe me, I’ll send signed for in the future) but then that’s all I’ve ever done in the past. The only evidence I have is that I kept the receipt from having sold it (to a reputable scrap merchants so I would imagine they would also have a record), and I also insured my new car on the same day I cancelled the old policy (with the same insurers) My policy states that I may drive another vehicle, but that obviously doesn’t insure the vehicle itself.
Bazile – the answer to your question is yes.
Whenever dealing with persons from a governmental organisation, I always assume that they are completely incompetent (based on experience).
Therefore when advising DVLA of a vehicle transfer, I keep a copy of the document sent; and if I don’t receive confirmation within two weeks, I send them another copy of the document.
I would advise everyone to do the same.
Whenever dealing with persons from a governmental organisation, I always assume that they are completely incompetent (based on experience).
Therefore when advising DVLA of a vehicle transfer, I keep a copy of the document sent; and if I don’t receive confirmation within two weeks, I send them another copy of the document.
I would advise everyone to do the same.
“Just out of interest .
Does that mean that anyone could receive a summons for a vehicle they no longer have (even if it was scrapped - no matter how
long ago) - but was not notified to the DVLA ?”
Yes. But obviously the longer ago the allegation dates from the less likely it will be to succeed. That’s why it’s important to (a) keep a copy of stuff you send to the DVLA and (b) chase them up if you get no acknowledgement.
“It’s a summons of referral to court.”
Is this in England/Wales, Lylou?
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. I believe the situation is this:
You can probably take advantage of the “escape clause” I mentioned. However it will need some work. You will have to show, firstly, that you were not “the person keeping the vehicle”. This should not be difficult: you have the receipt from the scrap merchant and you can show that you ended the insurance on the old vehicle and started it on a new one. That should be sufficient to convince the court you were no longer the keeper. The next bit is a little more tricky but should not be insurmountable. The obligations you have “…under subsection (7)(a) below..” which I mentioned earlier do indeed refer to your duty to inform the DVLA of the change of ownership. The regulations (contained in the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002) simply say that you must inform the DVLA. It makes no mention that the DVLA can make an irrefutable assumption that you did not advise them of the change simply by virtue of a lack of an acknowledgement. I don’t know of any case law that suggests otherwise. You can provide evidence, under oath or affirmation, that you provided notification of the change in the required manner. It will be a matter for the court whether they believe you.
My suggestion is that you attend on the day of your hearing with the intention of pleading Not Guilty (on the basis I set out above). Ask to speak to the prosecutor on your arrival and explain you intend to plead not guilty, outline your defence and ask if he has any “observations”. There is a slim possibility that the prosecutor may fold and discontinue the matter. If you cannot get to see the prosecutor, or he has no “observations” in your favour you can maintain your NG plea when you are called into court. You will not face a trial that day but the matter will be set down for trial at a later date.
It is important you are aware that since the issue of you informing the DVLA rests on your testimony alone there is a possibility you may still be found guilty. If you pleaded guilty you face an income related fine – reduced by a third for your guilty plea, a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Min £30) and £85 costs. If you are found guilty following a trial you will lose the discount on your fine and minimum costs of around £300 but possibly up to £600. That's the choice you must make.
Does that mean that anyone could receive a summons for a vehicle they no longer have (even if it was scrapped - no matter how
long ago) - but was not notified to the DVLA ?”
Yes. But obviously the longer ago the allegation dates from the less likely it will be to succeed. That’s why it’s important to (a) keep a copy of stuff you send to the DVLA and (b) chase them up if you get no acknowledgement.
“It’s a summons of referral to court.”
Is this in England/Wales, Lylou?
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. I believe the situation is this:
You can probably take advantage of the “escape clause” I mentioned. However it will need some work. You will have to show, firstly, that you were not “the person keeping the vehicle”. This should not be difficult: you have the receipt from the scrap merchant and you can show that you ended the insurance on the old vehicle and started it on a new one. That should be sufficient to convince the court you were no longer the keeper. The next bit is a little more tricky but should not be insurmountable. The obligations you have “…under subsection (7)(a) below..” which I mentioned earlier do indeed refer to your duty to inform the DVLA of the change of ownership. The regulations (contained in the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002) simply say that you must inform the DVLA. It makes no mention that the DVLA can make an irrefutable assumption that you did not advise them of the change simply by virtue of a lack of an acknowledgement. I don’t know of any case law that suggests otherwise. You can provide evidence, under oath or affirmation, that you provided notification of the change in the required manner. It will be a matter for the court whether they believe you.
My suggestion is that you attend on the day of your hearing with the intention of pleading Not Guilty (on the basis I set out above). Ask to speak to the prosecutor on your arrival and explain you intend to plead not guilty, outline your defence and ask if he has any “observations”. There is a slim possibility that the prosecutor may fold and discontinue the matter. If you cannot get to see the prosecutor, or he has no “observations” in your favour you can maintain your NG plea when you are called into court. You will not face a trial that day but the matter will be set down for trial at a later date.
It is important you are aware that since the issue of you informing the DVLA rests on your testimony alone there is a possibility you may still be found guilty. If you pleaded guilty you face an income related fine – reduced by a third for your guilty plea, a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Min £30) and £85 costs. If you are found guilty following a trial you will lose the discount on your fine and minimum costs of around £300 but possibly up to £600. That's the choice you must make.
Thank you, that’s very helpful. As previously mentioned, I am due a baby just 2 weeks later and so will be on maternity leave. My income will therefore be statutory maternity pay at this point, and will be for a year after that. I have absolutely learnt a lesson with regards to keeping paperwork and chasing the dvla, and advise everyone else to do the same. Thank you for your help
Indeed why?
The “Continuous Insurance” legislation is designed to minimise the numbers of uninsured vehicles on the road. All vehicle owners have to do is to notify the DVLA that they have disposed of their vehicle. This can be done online with an immediate acknowledgement being provided. If it’s done by post it is incumbent on the owner to ensure the details have been received. But even if they don’t, as I have explained, there are exceptions which can avoid conviction.
I don’t see anything ass-like in that at all.
The “Continuous Insurance” legislation is designed to minimise the numbers of uninsured vehicles on the road. All vehicle owners have to do is to notify the DVLA that they have disposed of their vehicle. This can be done online with an immediate acknowledgement being provided. If it’s done by post it is incumbent on the owner to ensure the details have been received. But even if they don’t, as I have explained, there are exceptions which can avoid conviction.
I don’t see anything ass-like in that at all.
"because someone who knows the law has basically advised: "it may be better from you to say you did something when you didnt" -depressing..."
Explain please, Peter.
Lylou has assured us she was not the keeper of the vehicle and that she informed the DVLA that she had disposed of the vehicle. She has no written proof of it, that's all. I have explained how she may take advantage of a statutory exception to the allegation. Nobody - least of all me - is suggesting "she says she did something when she didn't."
Explain please, Peter.
Lylou has assured us she was not the keeper of the vehicle and that she informed the DVLA that she had disposed of the vehicle. She has no written proof of it, that's all. I have explained how she may take advantage of a statutory exception to the allegation. Nobody - least of all me - is suggesting "she says she did something when she didn't."
From your post it would appear that whoever you sold the vehicle to did not scrap it, but drove it and it was probably caught by ANPR camera (otherwise if the police had pulled them over, they would have impounded the vehicle).
But consider this, they could still be driving the car on the road – waiting to drive past another ANPR camera, with you as the registered keeper.
But consider this, they could still be driving the car on the road – waiting to drive past another ANPR camera, with you as the registered keeper.
Latest Posts
Home & Garden1 min ago
Crosswords4 mins ago
Technology4 mins ago
Motoring5 mins ago
Food & Drink5 mins ago