Safe Speed Forums

They'd notice that.

Deleted most of the quote to stop a overlong post for a simple answer

My post was really to look at a way that driver based insurance could still be easily checked in respect of Abercrombie's post. That does not mean I would trust this government to implement it, just that it could be done in a non-invasive way.

I could easily see the government using an RFID system in speed cameras...

I could also see a vehicle owner being automatically fined for the driver not carrying the insurance card. The technology is not at fault, just the use, a little like guns really.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

A key issue is that the police databases of driver/car credentials and existing polices are trustworthy and comparable. Another issue is that the credentials used "in real time" by a driver are accessible and also trustworthy. When those preconditions are met, insurance can be monitored properly. Else it's just a mess.

I think the idea of forced labour if the uninsured crash and damage someone else's car or property is a good one. But you have to have easy ways of catching the buggers! The problem is consequences. People don't learn when they don't feel the consequences of their actions personally. If there is a fund that covers them then they think why bother, the MIB will pay out if I damage someone else's car. Making them personally liable so they have to pay it back through labour, loss of benefits and generally being hounded until they just cough up is better than just letting them off.

Those that are caught without insurance should also have to pay all the lost premiums, in full. Attachment of earnings, or benefits could be used. If they just get off with a pathetic fine then there is little incentive when a tiny, tiny fraction of the uninsured actually get caught. Get fed up of seeing them in court reports getting piddly little fines or a bit of litter picking. If you can't afford the insurance then you can't have a car, end of. Get the bus, get a bicycle.

Making it a specific offence to have an uninsured vehicle is just going to make life difficult for traders (group policies), the police and other companies that self insure. Also what about people with vehicles that they have broken or owned pre-sorn?! If the mid is continually inaccurate and prone to errors from insurance companies not updating it correctly or in a timely fashion then that is just going to cause more bother. I can see there are going to be a lot of headlines in the daily mail about insured drivers having their cars confiscated because their insurance co has cocked up.

I think there are two ways to go - either punish the uninsured properly or get rid of the concept of driving while insured. Create a national insurance scheme that everyone is automatically in. This could also cover personal injury and all sorts. Cyclists should also have compulsory insurance and some form of registration as they hurt pedestrians too. Ditto scooter riders and any other motorised doodad that is used in a public place.

At the moment it is just a mish mash of the worst of both worlds as the uninsured aren't pursued properly but administrative cock ups will have have a disproportionate effect on the law abiding.

Any one can do it. You have to lodge some cash with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court. This is valid when the vehicle is being driven under the control of its owner, which is a little vague. Section 143 RTA 1988 refers.

The amount of cash can be varied without prior notice by the Accountant General and at time of posting stands at £500,000.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

That is actually not very much money assuming medical costs of a lifetime of care and lorries carrying £1million loads exist.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I always thought it had to be a million minimum. 500k is wild afternoon!!!

In terms of potential payouts I agree with you. In terms of my chances of ever having enough spare cash to go down this route I will have to disagree.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Yes but every prem footballer could and most district judges! And If I sold eveything I get quite close.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

It's a lot to pledge just to save 92 pounds a year, though, which is what I'd save. It'd take me 5000 years to get my money back!

If you lodge your £500K, what appears on the Motor Insurance Database. No policy in force, perhaps?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

It is not the elected government that is a problem.
It is the unelected government that is.
Oh well, most are against road pricing except when it has another name...
Eventually we will all be paying higher prices for insurance, even when we are low risk, so that others (previously the great un-insured) will be insured.
I'd be interested in the implementation of no-claims-bonus in the pay-at-pump insurance scheme......
Plus, of course, will drivers without a licence be insured ?
At the moment they are not...even if a current policy is held.
There are a whole load of ways to implement such a scheme, all will (in some way) be subject to misuse....and not by the drivers.
Disabling the rfid could be solved by simply tying it into the ecu...no rfid, no engine start.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

One defining feature of humanity is our propensity to improve things. We're happy to accept the benefits, but improvement in a free market system depends on accountability. It's the accountability aspect that causes great concern. We'd like to have the benefits without identifying exactly who owes what to who. But that was tried by the commies, and it led nowhere at all. It was "against human nature", everyone said.

You would not be insuring the uninsured drivers but insuring yourself against them. It could be a pragmatic approach based on the apparent inability to stop the problem. If enough people break a law you cannot or will not enforce just find a way of making it legal. That the people breaking the law generally do not have enough money to pay fines but the people that want protection from them have money may also be a reason.

Cynical, moi?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Ah ha, so I was right? (my post Wed 21 Jan 03:11)

Its still £1/2m? I would assume that the Accountant General notifies the database when this is done.

I’ve just checked my policy and I am covered for £20,000,000 for third party losses.

Seems that the wealthy drink driver or uninsurable who “can’t” get insurance can get on the road legally via this.

You already are insuring yourself against them, now.
What exactly would the difference be then, bearing in mind that the existing situation (accident damage/injury by uninsured drivers being covered by the existing arrangements....at the cost to insured drivers) is covered anyway ?
At the moment a disqual cannot be insured.
An under-age driver without a licence is a disqual by law.
Your comprehensive insurance would cover you for most things at the moment, even if the other driver legs it, or is disqualified.

In any case, I think there is too much research into why some drivers crash, and not enough into why some drivers never crash....even when they drive hundreds of miles a day.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

They don't need any money - have them pick up dog shit and litter. There's plenty of that around in filthy Britain, and we have plenty of wastrels to clean it up.

A very profound observation. In any endeavour we learn most from studying the best protagonists.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Chatting to a friend of mine who is in his early twenties, his insurance for a small, non sporty car is astronomical, should we perhaps be placing a cap on the amount (percentage) of profit that insurers can make on any one policy? Speaking to him and some of his mates about insurance is that the insurance companies are ripping drivers off, one actually dug up some details of the profits posted by one insurer and pointed out that is was a bloody good industry to have shares in.

Rightly or wrongly if the companies providing something that is required by law is seen as ripping off a captive audience, the next step is to say 'why bother with a legalised con' and drive without insurance?

I'm in no way condoning this but just throwing it out as an idea for comment.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

http://www.financemarkets.co.uk/2008/03/13/car-insurance-companies-set-to-make-a-profit-as-premiums-outstrip-claims/

Part of the reason is that they are charging high premiums to high risk drivers.
Don't forget that insurance companies do not cover only vehicles, many cover home and industrial risk as well. You think your car insurance is high, start a company and then cringe at the cost of employers liability insurance......23 employees = £60,000.00 +
In any case, largely accurate stats show that the average 20 year old male is many times more likely to have an accident than someone in their mid 40's +
So, why should Mr Safe-and-Slow have to subsidise Mst Dangerous-and-fast ?
Come to that, why should I pay an extra 50p/litre to provide insurance for those that cannot be bothered ?
That would put my insurance into the extra-high cost that Mst Fast-and Dangerous pays, while his, on a lower mileage, would be very small.....
I have absolutely no doubt that the technology is available to enable that system....so to support that and then protest at road-pricing would be hypocritical to say the least.
In any case, to have that system enabled and operating would be road pricing....the thin edge of the wedge.
Oh yes, safeguards will be built into the system.
Ok.
Well, I do not think any will be built-in, and I do not think there is any intention to build any in....

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing