Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

driving while banned


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2146 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

im near the back end of my ban and have started driving to work,

not ideal but found work and the only way to get there was by car, I

 

thought for the last 5 month of my ban it would go by quick with no problems,

however I have had an accident, my fault.

so ive had an accident while banned from driving.

 

whats likely to happen ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were the police involved? Were you insured?

 

What is the value of the damage to the other vehicle and was anybody injured?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the damage and I was insured but worst afraid if I go to my insurance they will check find out I was banned and that will void anyway, no police involvement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're completely right that if the insurers discover that you don't have a licence that they will refuse to insure you. I'm afraid that I think in the circumstances you better put your hands up, ask for an estimate for the repairs and then pay them. You have no choice. If you inform your insurer and they withdraw insurance then you will be in the same trouble – and you may even find that the police are involved. You may find that the insurer feels it necessary to inform the police. That may still all happen.

 

 

Now I'm not intending to be judgemental but I suppose that you are realising now that by driving without insurance, you are committing a criminal offence which could even attract a suspended sentence - as well as a further disqualification maybe two years or more. I don't know how long your first disqualification was for. Also I don't know what kind of driving record you have.

 

More importantly, in an accident you could have hurt somebody and even possibly caused them life changing injuries which could require lifetime care. You would be unable to pay for this and they would be left to battle it out with the MIB while you got on with your life - after you got out of prison.

 

If you get away with this then you are very lucky and at the very least I would certainly learn the lesson and not do it again. The consequences are just too terrible to imagine both for yourself and for your victims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the contact details for the guy though that's the prob, I gave him mine and all I have is a letter stating to give to my insurance, don't know how to contact him, all I have is his name

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you disclose the convictions and the ban when you applied for insurance? I guess not, if you had I presume they wouldn't have insured you. Insurers often don't check your conviction record when they issue the policy but do check it when you make a claim. If that's what your insurer would do then they will find out and most likely void the policy and not cover the claim. Won't the third party contact them of you don't? Or was no TP vehicle involved?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you didn't even take his contact details.

 

Well I'm very sorry but I don't know what else to advise. If you want to do things correctly and honestly then you should forward the letter to your insurers and then let everything take its course.

 

I suppose that the letter is from his insurers. I suppose you could write to them and tell them that you accept liability unreservedly and that they should send you a quote for the work and the bill and it will be settled immediately. That might sort it out.

 

I'm afraid that I have no other suggestions to make. Whatever you do don't lie to anyone. You can try to deal with it without admitting the truth – but the moment you lie, the seriousness of your problems will increase dramatically

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you disclose the convictions and the ban when you applied for insurance? I guess not, if you had I presume they wouldn't have insured you. Insurers often don't check your conviction record when they issue the policy but do check it when you make a claim. If that's what your insurer would do then they will find out and most likely void the policy and not cover the claim. Won't the third party contact them of you don't? Or was no TP vehicle involved?

 

this is a good point. I had assumed that the disqualification had been imposed after the insurance had been taken out.

 

Please will the OP tell us how she obtained her insurance policy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once insurers become aware one of a claim first things that happens is a three way conference call between yourself, the insurer and DVLA to verify your details and status of your licence. Unless you can get this resolved without insurers I fear that you might come unstuck at an early stage

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm not intending to be judgemental but I suppose that you are realising now that by driving without insurance, you are committing a criminal offence which could even attract a suspended sentence - as well as a further disqualification maybe two years or more.

Presumably you mean driving while disqualified. Driving without insurance has a maximum penalty of a fine and a driving ban - it cannot attract a prison sentence, suspended or otherwise. From a criminal viewpoint the lack of insurance is very much secondary to the fact that he was driving while disqualified - that has a maximum penalty of 6 months in prison (though a community order and/or suspended sentence would be more likely unless the OP is a repeat offender).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably you mean driving while disqualified. Driving without insurance has a maximum penalty of a fine and a driving ban - it cannot attract a prison sentence, suspended or otherwise. From a criminal viewpoint the lack of insurance is very much secondary to the fact that he was driving while disqualified - that has a maximum penalty of 6 months in prison (though a community order and/or suspended sentence would be more likely unless the OP is a repeat offender).

 

Yes, you are right. My bad.

 

I see that the car can also be impounded and destroyed

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are on a very sticky wicket here.

If your (supposed) insurers get wind of your accident they will certainly inquire into your driving status, establish you were disqualified and void the policy retrospectively.

 

You don't say whether you were banned when you started (or renewed) the policy or whether you received your ban during its duration.

It makes no difference to you as far as driving whilst disqualified and with no insurance goes, but it may make a difference to the Third Party in the way his claim is met.

 

It's a bit involved and need not concern you particularly.

Your idea that he should claim on his own insurance is not going to help.

 

Although he may do that, his insurers will make inquiries of yours (to recover their outlay or implement any agreement they have between them) and you are back to square one.

 

I believe your only hope is to offer to meet the claim in some way, but I imagine the Third Party will already have reported the accident to his insurers (as he is bound to do under the terms of his policy) and it may already be too late.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also broke my ankle on the 23rd so am at the min not working and I cannot even claim sick pay, hubby has to keep me at the min. what happens if he says the damage is £2000 or more, I suppose im panic stricken now but worst case

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute worse case? You end up in prison for 6 months, a further ban and fine. But thats rare unless youre a repeat offender, or a very serious incident occurs.

 

What will likely happen is a suspended sentence, fine and further time on your ban. Thats if you cant settle away from the insurers.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute worse case? You end up in prison for 6 months, a further ban and fine. But thats rare unless youre a repeat offender, or a very serious incident occurs.

 

What will likely happen is a suspended sentence, fine and further time on your ban. Thats if you cant settle away from the insurers.

 

 

And possibly having to pay the TP for the cost of repairs to his own vehicle if you are responsible for the accident. You may not be legally liable for the accident though, we don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were the police involved? Were you insured?

 

What is the value of the damage to the other vehicle and was anybody injured?

 

 

It is impossible to be insured whilst banned. Its part of the terms to hold a valid licence to make the insurance valid.

This does not, however, stop a third party making a claim but it messes you up with the police.

 

What happens is the person banned gets done for driving not in accordance with licence and failing to have third party insurance.

 

The victim makes a claim on the other driver. Insurance covers costs.

The insurance company then will come after you for the costs involved that they have paid out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible to be insured whilst banned.

 

 

Correct

 

 

Its part of the terms to hold a valid licence to make the insurance valid.

 

 

Incorrect. It is usually phrased along the lines of "holds, or has held and is not disqualified from holding" a licence.

 

 

This is due to s.88 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 allowing a person, subject to certain conditions, to drive while an application to hold a licence has been submitted.

 

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/88/2006-01-01

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/695575/inf188x6-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf

 

 

I'd agree: if the OP was banned, then they cannot hold a valid licence, and cannot be insured (under standard policy terms)

I disagree that they have to hold a valid licence though : so, if they voluntarily surrendered their licence due to a medical condition, haven't been told by DVLA that their licence is revoked and then their condition becomes such that the driver believes they meet the medical standard - the driver can apply for their licence and while the application is being processed can drive under s.88. Naturally they can't lawfully do this unless they hold insurance. Hence the insurers are allowed to insure the driver, provided the driver meets the s.88 requirements.

 

 

 

 

 

This does not, however, stop a third party making a claim but it messes you up with the police.

 

What happens is the person banned gets done for driving not in accordance with licence

 

 

If they are lucky, they only get done for driving other than in accordance with licence (a fine and get points too, as they couldn't have held a licence if they were still disqual, but no possibility of a custodial term).

More likely, they get done for driving while disqual ; where they get an extension to their ban OR 6 points, and a custodial sentence is possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

and failing to have third party insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, and not wishing to add petrol to the fire, what happens if the TP insurer has a CMC handling the claim? Courtesy car, out of pocket expenses, personal injury (either genuine or encouraged to develop one by the CMC?) I guess that whilst MIB might pick up the cost of the damage but so far as I am aware they wouldn't settle a PI claim? Could there potentially be action taken to recover directly against the OP?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, and not wishing to add petrol to the fire, what happens if the TP insurer has a CMC handling the claim? Courtesy car, out of pocket expenses, personal injury (either genuine or encouraged to develop one by the CMC?) I guess that whilst MIB might pick up the cost of the damage but so far as I am aware they wouldn't settle a PI claim? Could there potentially be action taken to recover directly against the OP?

 

 

Of course the MIB settle personal injury claims under the uninsured drivers scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the MIB settle personal injury claims under the uninsured drivers scheme.

 

And then the MIB can claim against the uninsured driver (if their details are known), aiming to recover the settlement sum .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP knows she is in a bad position and probably realises from various posts above it is potentially worse. It is time to be constructive.

 

To ameliorate her potential problems she needs to deal directly with the other Driver and his claim sooner than through his insurers or claims handler. This is to prevent escalation to the police and her own "insurer".

 

If she can successfully reach agreement with the other Driver over his damaged car (and pay it) her only lasting problem would be declaring her past accident on applying for insurance, when she is able to. But that is for the future.

 

 

I don't have the contact details for the guy though that's the prob, I gave him mine and all I have is a letter stating to give to my insurance, don't know how to contact him, all I have is his name

 

The other driver did not provide his details following an accident.

This could be a useful little bit of leverage, but not a strong threat as it could be potentially shooting herself in the foot should everything come out in the open.

 

She needs to contact him directly. She now has a name for him. Does the letter show his car registration number?

 

If not, she should request his address etc from whomsoever sent her the letter she has received, stating that he did not provide it at the time. Do this by letter to have a record and demonstrate the matter is not being ignored.

 

 

 

On another topic.

I assume she is no longer driving her car while banned, so her present "insurance" has no value (other than possibly for 'fire or theft' from private property). This can be cancelled forthwith along with the Road Tax, and at least receive a return of remaining premium and tax.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And then the MIB can claim against the uninsured driver (if their details are known), aiming to recover the settlement sum .....

 

Although in this case the OP has an insurance policy so the MIB might well appoint her own insurers to settle the third party claim as this is an indemnity issue between the insurers and the OP (i.e. OP has breached her insurance contract).

 

And then OP's own insurers will pursue her for anything they pay out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

to rub salt in the wounds you will most likely lose your job when they find out that you are introuble regarding the honesty issues surrounding this incident.

 

yes, the MIB will come after you for whatever they can as well. It will be in the other party's interests to name you and the insurer even if your insurer doesnt have to pay out as it starts a chain of events that gets to where they want it to end up

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...