If you renewed your insurance, knowing you were going to be prosecuted for driving without insurance, and you failed to inform the insurance company then you have commited a fraud (again, the worst thing that an insurance company thinks you can do) and your insurance is invalid.

Two things,

a) The OP has (presumably) been cautioned for failing to produce a valid insurance certificate. They are going to write to him in 8-12 weeks with a Notice of Intention to Prosecute. So at this juncture, technically, the OP doesn’t “know” he’s going to be prosecuted.

b) Are you actually obliged to notify the insurance company of things that might happen? You’re obliged to tell them about existing convictions when you take out the policy, and subsequent changes such as new convictions. In 20 years of driving I’ve never been asked to declare any pending prosecutions when taking out insuance.

(Standard disclaimer, this is as I understand it, I am not a lawyer, do not fold spindle or mutilate, value may go up as well as down etc etc)

a) Oh yes he does
b) Oh yes you are (material facts they call it)

a) The OP has (presumably) been cautioned for failing to produce a valid insurance certificate. They are going to write to him in 8-12 weeks with a Notice of Intention to Prosecute. So at this juncture, technically, the OP doesn’t “know” he’s going to be prosecuted.

No NIP (or Section 1 warning as they are known in Scotland) is required for this offence. The letter in 8-12 weeks will not be an NIP.

Sorry Alcopop, but I’ve got no sympathy.
You were driving uninsured – end of.
If it’s just because you didn’t read the letter your insurance company sent then you need to take the whole thing a bit more bloody seriously. Perhaps a fat fine and some points will help with that.

An uninsured driver piled into the back of me (and several others) on the M1 a few years back. I’ve got no idea whether he was a serial offender or just ‘forgot’ to read the letter telling him he needed to insure his car. Quite frankly I don’t give a shit, as either way I finished up paying for it.

I rode a 100cc bike in London without appropriate insurance cover ages ago. Got stopped dozens of times, never a problem. Once, just once, an officer did a good job on checking my details and… 5 months later I was poorer (£250) and richer (6 extra points). The effects were felt on my premiums for 4 years. Lovely!
BTW No sympathy from me either, you get what you ask for.

But you don’t seem to have learned anything.

If you renewed your insurance, knowing you were going to be prosecuted for driving without insurance, and you failed to inform the insurance company then you have commited a fraud (again, the worst thing that an insurance company thinks you can do) and your insurance is invalid.
Take it on the chin, Alcopop and get it sorted properly.

As soon as the penalty points are issued and on my lisence then i’ll inform the insurance company so they can adjust accordingly as just now there are only 3 points on my driving license !

Take it on the chin

im not trying to get out of anything I only asked about paying the original FP now that the two charges are combined,dont you worry yourself my chin will be taking it

Driving without insurance, first offence, 6 to 8 points. (only 6 if FPN)
Use of hand–held mobile phone whilst in charge of a vehicle, 3 points

Plus your existing 3 points.
12 – 14 points in total.

So, you are looking at a 6-month ban under the totting-up rules.

Might be worth reading this.

Alcopop – you really are a (that thing I can’t call you on here without getting a ban).

If you want independent advice – pop into an insurance broker and say “does it matter if I’ve been stopped for no insurance but haven’t been to court yet?”.

Verb = To license, licensed.
Noun = A licence.
Made up word = lisence

A thing that will be missing from your wallet soon = A Licence.

In 20 years of driving I’ve never been asked to declare any pending prosecutions when taking out insuance.

One of the questions on the comparison sites and one that we ask is

“Any motoring convictions, points on your license in the last 5 years or any PENDING convictions?”

So you will have been asked and you have to advise of any pending convictions too.

Possible senario for OP is an IN10 and a big fine. IN10 though means most companies won’t touch you with a barge pole. You’ll have to hope they go easy on you as far as prosecutions are concerned.

Good point. Getting insurance with an IN10 on your licence makes life quite tricky. Possibly more tricky than the basic 6-month ban itself….

You won’t be able to pay the FPN for the mobile phone offence at the court as the police will have retained the court copy of the ticket on learning of the insurance offence. Both charges will be submitted on a standard prosecution report to the PF who will consider the circumstances. The PF can decide to; bin the case, warn you, offer you a FPN, or cite you for court. Given the two charges under consideration, they will most likely take the last option. The English / Welsh licence surrendering process does not apply in Scotland.

The car would normally have been taken off you at the time (Section 165A RTA 1988) but the cop has given you the benefit of the doubt at the roadside and HO/RT’d you instead. Alas your genuine oversight has fallen foul of the ‘strict liability’ found in many statutes; the offence is absolute, there is no need for guilty intent, the onus rests with the owner to insure. Penalties for a first insurance offence are 6-8 points and vastly varying fines dependant on offence circumstance and offender income. The mobile phone offence is likely to remain at 3 points and £60.

Your best course of action is to gather together proof of continuous insurance cover over the years and present it to the PF directly with a covering letter. You could even ‘fess up to the mobile phone offence as a sweetener. Fiscal’s are human and aren’t blind to human failings. They can smell BS at 100yds so don’t over egg the explanation. If that doesn’t work, have your lawyer present your previous continuous cover and outline your genuine oversight at court. It may reduce the fine and points a bit.

Just to clarify other posts mentioning void cover due to expired MOTs or other offences. You and your insurer have entered a contract of absolute good faith. You pay the premium, they provide the cover against third party risks. Regardless of if you are bladdered, speeding, driving on baldy tyres in a thunderstorm, modified the car without informing them etc etc; if you have paid your premium, crash into someone and are subject to a claim from a third party, they are obliged to pay up to the third party on your behalf (if you are at fault). What your insurer can then do if you have broken other laws or failed to declare material facts at renewal time is refuse to pay your own losses and costs and, if it is financially worth their while, attempt to recoup the costs they paid to the third party back from you. This process was created to ensure that third party victims are compensated by insurers regardless of any dispute between the insured and their insurer. This can get a ‘bit’ expensive once the lawyers are done with you.

Undeclared mods such as window tints, non standard wheels, aftermarket ICE can all catch people out, so if in doubt, declare the lot.

Hopefully it’ll have sunk in by now.. mobile phone use has become the fourth highest contributing factor in collision stats.

You’d hope it wasbleeding obvious – however good a driver you think you are using a phone means you’re distracted from the job at hand ( driving ) you won’t register potential hazards (a cyclist for example?) nor will you react as quickly. TRL research has shown you are four times more likely to be involved in a crash if using your mobile phone.

Re the insurance. There’s no excuse, it’s one of those things that needs to be done once a year. Amazing how many people claim they missed the renewal. Another interesting fact, uninsured drivers are five times more likely to be committing another offence (like using a mobile phone for example). You were lucky the vehicle was not seized (impounded) (standard policy in my force)” minimum £150 recovery fee.

A final tip 😉 the police national computer (linked to automatic number plate recognition camera’s) takes it’s info from the Motor Insurers Database. It’s always worthwhile checking the vehicle is shown as insured on that (no cost), and, if you are driving another vehicle or on trade or other cover, keep a copy of the policy details with you:

http://www.askmid.com/

http://www.askmid.com/

Do the Scots not sieze & crush uninsured cars?

As for being covered third party to drive a car not owned by you, the car you are driving still needs insurance cover.

165A seizures apply in Scotland. Thousands of uninsured cars have been crushed since the legislation was passed.

Cynic-al

It is not “normal” for Mrs Poly who is a named driver on Mr Poly’s policy to be entitled to drive other cars. I think it may have been in the past, and I think there may be some insurers who do, but most of the big names don’t.

AnalogueAndy

Hopefully it’ll have sunk in by now.. mobile phone use has become the fourth highest contributing factor in collision stats.

You’d hope it wasbleeding obvious – however good a driver you think you are using a phone means you’re distracted from the job at hand ( driving ) you won’t register potential hazards (a cyclist for example?) nor will you react as quickly. TRL research has shown you are four times more likely to be involved in a crash if using your mobile phone.possibly, but the research I’ve seen actually suggests minimal difference between using a handheld phone (an offence) and using a handsfree phone (not an offence) – and then its also acceptable for police officers to use their radios (and phones?) whilst driving, so whilst I don’t condone using a mobile whilst driving I don’t buy into your implication that he’s automatically a major burden on society.

Another interesting fact, uninsured drivers are five times more likely to be committing another offence (like using a mobile phone for example).

do you think that is statistically valid? I’m much more likely to be “caught” for not having insurance if I first get stopped for another offence. I also suspect I’m much more likely to be shown some leniency by an understanding officer for something like a defective break light, or a “minor” speeding offence etc IF I checkout on the computer OK but more likely to get reported for it if I don’t.

So, what was the outcome??

My mate as Promised got six points and a fine. Pleaded his story but magistrates didn’t give a ****!!

but the research I’ve seen actually suggests minimal difference between using a handheld phone (an offence) and using a handsfree phone (not an offence)

Erm how do you catch someone using a handsfree phone? you could be talking to someone else in the car, to yourself or just singing along to the radio. Yep using the phone whilst driving is bad no argument but gonna be tricky to pull someone up for it.

Erm how do you catch someone using a handsfree phone?

When they’re lying unconscious in a crumpled heap and the other person is still talking to them on the hands-free ?

Personally I won’t allow my passengers to talk to me – I take my driving very seriously and I don’t like any distractions. Only the other day some fecker overtook me ’cause I wasn’t paying attention and concentrating enough on what was happening.

Personally I won’t allow my passengers to talk to me – I take my driving very seriously and I don’t like any distractions. Only the other day some fecker overtook me ’cause I wasn’t paying attention and concentrating enough on what was happening.

So what on Earth were you doing if not concentrating?

Posting on STW, gotta love 3G.

i answered a call on my mobile(hand held)
while driving stupid

It’s illegal. suck it up.