Speed Camera Vans

[patdavies]

That's an interesting point. I had been with them for several years and there was no misunderstanding on my part. They clearly said that they need the car to be registered in the name of the insured. Needless to say I'm not with them any more.

 

Some insurance companies require that the insured is the RK; others don't - it is a marketing decision only.

 

Amy car on a personal lease plan does not have the driver as the RK - it remains the leasing company - but people manage to insure these cars without issue.

[rickyd]

I'm not disagreeing with anyone about this, just telling you what happened to me. Further research suggests that each insurance company has its own conditions and this particular one would only insure me to drive if I was the RK.

[patdavies]

One other thing - if there's no requirement for an RK to be insured, how would the car get a tax disk? I only ask because I have just taken my other car off a SORN and because my NCD is used on my main car, the premium for the scond car was quite high. My partner offered to get insurance instead but was told by several insurance companies only RK's can do this.

 

So without an insurance document in my name for that vehicle I couldn't get it taxed. Because we didn't want to transfer the car to her name we ended up going to a specialist insurer on a limited miles policy.

 

The premise that only the RK can tax a car is completely false.

 

Whilst the RK is responsible in law for tax or SORN, anybody can tax a car.

[rickyd]

Pat - that's not always true, my last lease car showed me as the registered keeper, whilst the leasing company (Lombard) remained the owner.

 

But I accept your previous points about RK's and insurance.

 

I don't think I said that only RK's can tax cars, I just wondered how I could tax a car if I didn't have insurance for that car because my insurance company wouldn't provide cover as I wasn't the RK

[rickyd]

From the DVLA website -

Taxing without a Registration Certificate or New Keeper Supplement

 

If you’re shown as the registered keeper of the vehicle on DVLA records, you can tax in person or by post at your nearest DVLA local office.

You’ll need to complete a V62 ‘Application for a Vehicle Registration Certificate (V5C) which must be accompanied by £25 (fee for a duplicate Registration Certificate). Include this with a completed V10 ‘Vehicle licence application’, MOT, insurance and payment for vehicle tax.

 

 

If your address has changed, you’ll need to provide your driving licence, original bank or building society statement or recent utility bill. If your name has changed, you need to provide your marriage certificate, decree nisi, decree absolute or deed poll.

 

 

If you’re not shown as the registered keeper on DVLA records you cannot tax the vehicle.

 

 

 

You’ll need to apply for a Registration Certificate in your name. To get one, fill in form V62 ‘Application for a Vehicle Registration Certificate’ and post to DVLA, Swansea SA99 1DD. You may have to wait up to four weeks for a new certificate to arrive. In the meantime, you should keep your vehicle off the road.

[crem]

Rickyd, the quote you are using there is only applicable if your not the RK AND you have lost the V5C document.

[TD27]

Which is why cars are stopped and the driver questioned if no insurance is shown, they cannot convict on ANPR evidence its to aid the police in identifying vehicles that may be uninsured just as the roadside breath test indicates drivers that MAY be over the limit.

 

And also why when drivers do not appear to be insured for the vehicle they're driving we check on other vehicles they may have access to for which they hold a policy of insurance. This may cover them for 3rd party liability although it's becoming rarer. Also, many named drivers on policies believe this will cover them to drive any other vehicle on third party cover. Too many cars are being seized and points applied because people aren't checking thoroughly and / or are making costly assumptions.

 

Even if you've been with the same company, most send through a little booklet each year with changes to the policy, how many of us read them? Now on here, I'd say more than most!!

[green_and_mean]

Whilst on the subject I read this today...

 

BBC NEWS | England | London | Why would anyone crush a Bentley?

 

It does seem criminal (excuse the pun) to crush a vehicle such as a hummer which surely even if it cannot be used on the road could be used as spares thus raising more money for HM govt than scrap?

[callsignCharlie]

Just a quick note, i got a speeding fine sent to my house and it was taken by one of those vans, i was pictured at 39mph.

 

They did not give me the option of speed school.

 

So i sent a letter of complaint in stating that if i was caught doing under 40mph then i should have been given the option of speed school, (worth a try).

 

I was amazed to get a letter back saying that they would basically leave the matter now!

[Bookworm]

By the way, I don't know if this has been reported elsewhere (knowing you eagle eyes, probably, lol), but just in case:

 

BBC NEWS | England | Merseyside | 'Periscope' parking fines quashed

 

;-)

[pin1onu]

I heard about this on the radio the other day. What people need to be careful with is that they haven't actually ruled the cameras illegal rather the PCNs were cancelled because of the following:

 

"It ruled the charges were invalid because there was a lack of evidence that adequate signs were in place about the cameras".

 

You can look for this as a possible out but it was suggested in places like Westminster that there are sufficient signs to enforce this sort of contravention.

[crem]

Just a quick note, i got a speeding fine sent to my house and it was taken by one of those vans, i was pictured at 39mph.

 

They did not give me the option of speed school.

 

So i sent a letter of complaint in stating that if i was caught doing under 40mph then i should have been given the option of speed school, (worth a try).

 

I was amazed to get a letter back saying that they would basically leave the matter now!

 

Not all areas operate a speed awareness course alternative to the fine/points so the fact that you were not offered one should have had no baring on whether they continued to prosecute you or not.

 

Even where a course is available, I understood they were only deemed appropriate for offences up to a few mph over the limit so your offence of 39mph in a 30 would be outside the permitted tolerance.

 

Why they would cease progressing your offence beats me. maybe when they went to look at your file to review the case with your letter, they might have found they had screwed up on the evidence (lost file etc) and, far be it for them to admit their cock up, they simply tell you they have decided to proceed.