Apparantly the government are considering extending SORN to cover vehicle insurance. Any vehicle which does not appear on the central insurance database will have a form sent to the registered keeper asking him/her to explain why.
Failure to complete and return the form will incur a £1000 fine.
|
|
sounds alright aslong as their prepared to pay for somebody else to do their donkey work!!
|
Considering that various different bodies report uninsured vehicles range from 1 in 8 to 1 in 10 then I think it is an excellent idea.
|
Until we do away with those stupid tax disc's & start paying for the Number plate & having to provide evidence of insurance & MOT to maintain the number plate, then the real problem will continue.
I keep vintage bikes & keep them insured, but not always MOT'd & taxed. I would object to more paper work with the possibilities of more fine exposure if I or the DVLA made a mistake.
Look at the figures, it's only those of us who respect our legal responsibilities who pay the fines not those who ignore the law. So more fines will only effect us, not the uninsured & couldn't care less.
The real problem is this is about DVLA raising more funds by fines, not about road safety.
|
But there is no obligation to insure a SORNed vehicle, as long as it is genuinely off the road. So if I were asked to declare whether my SORNed car has insurance, I could quite correctly answer Yes - because it is valuable and it might catch fire or be stolen - or No, because it is worthless but I am keeping it for spares.
What are they getting at?
I hope no one is suggesting that insurance should be compulsory for SORNed cars. One of mine consists of a stack of boxes full of bits. Perhaps I should insure the boxes in case they fall over and crush my toe.
|
What on earth is the point? Don't the databases show the information?
SORNs are a waste of time anyway as only law abiding motorists fill them in. Also, with the reduction in traffic police the chance of being caught are slim as the chav scum know only too well.
--
\"Nothing less than 8 cylinders will do\"
|
The point is that not filling a SORN in will be an offence in itself, and provided the police or the DVLA follow up such a case then the miscreant should be apprehended.
Whether they do or not is another matter, but with some estimates claiming one in ten drivers are uninsured something does need to be done.
|
But a car that is declared as SORN but is actually on the road will already be picked up on the licence database as a potential evader.
If they catch the driver at all then any insurance offence will get picked up then. I don't see how having a double record of tax and insurance will help to catch the car in use on the road.
The point about SORN is that there is a requirement for all vehicles to be registered, even those off the road. But there is no equivalent requirement for off-road cars to be insured, let alone registered as not insured. You can register with the DVLA as not taxed. But you can't register non-insurance with anyone, it is meaningless. The two cases simply are not analogous.
|
|
|
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/07450902ba7a9f040da1ed589c57f7de/a4a7efccac65a41be4f3aa298dd06a03.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/230dd6aea844aa30d588efa8b900ef14/029a8630a34ae30791712c3076ef0c2f.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/c994152be235002157202bb7bf6c4673/8254a522105dc76f7c77db1b591582e4.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/fallback/coming-soon.webp)
