In The Times this weekend is an article talking about the progress they are making in London to identify uninsured drivers in operation Reclaim. It appears that not all the stereotypes about who drives without insurance are true. They've been finding a large number of decent cars, including some exotica, that aren't insured.
To be honest, I was astounded at the number of cars they have been impounding: 30-40 cars a day. Supposedly this has all become possible because ordinary police officers are now able to use the check systems, relieving the load on qualified traffic officers.
I wonder whether this is typical of the country as a whole, or whether this is a function of the broader desire to avoid the congestion charge? Apparently claims through the third-party fund are down in the last year, although the figures did look to me like that might be a variation rather than statistically significant: 34,239 in 2007, down from 36,340 in 2006 and 37,693 in 2005. Either way, I can't see this being anything other than a good thing.
I haven't linked directly to the article as I recall this as being against site policy.
|
As a direct result of yesterday's Sunday Times article I visited the appropriate website this morning and discovered that my insurance is not registered!
As the renewal date was 10/02/08 (ie yesterday) I am assuming that the records need to be updated even though I have stayed with the same company.
It's a bit scary that people who stretch to buy so called exotic cars are unable (or unwilling) to afford to insure them.
|
It would seem that certain BiB are relying absolutely on MIB records to PITA and PNC that No Insurance in force when there is. Car seized and hassle all round.
I would advise you all to ensure this document is kept up to date and you do not delay re-newal etc.
dvd
|
PITA ?? Pain in the bottom?
During office hours a telephone call direct to the insurance company as well if the driver is adamant that they have cover. A belt and braces approach. Came very close to relieving a lady and her two very young children of their Volvo estate But it just didn't seem right. A final call to insurance company showed her to be a named driver on husbands policy where every other database said not.
|
|
|
|
When the MID Ins site first appeared I tried the family cars - own + 3 x sons & wives.
Out of the 8 cars all were on except 1 - he called his Ins Co and within 24 hrs it was on the MID database. 2 mins fixed it for him. His Ins Co is not a minnow but one of the biggest LLoyds Syndicates - if they make mistakes it is worth checking yours.
Imagine you are not on the database and are stopped by the side of the road - it could be 1 hour or so to get through on a mobile to your Broker / Ins Co and then satisfy PC Plod. It could be you walk away and your car is towed....................
|
While I approve of robust enforcement for car insurance the Police need to be thorough in using all avenues when checking if a car is insured, before they take any action.
The insurance database is always out-of-date, so there'll be a significant proportion of drivers cars 'pinged' for no insurance, even though they are insured - their details haven't entered the system yet.
In cases where a car is seized erroneously the Police should pay all the associated towage and storage fees, so the innocent motorist isn't out of pocket because of their mistake.
|
|
The database was maintained by Experian when all this started, don't know whether its still the case though.
|
So let me get this right - you insure your car, pay your money and everything's above board. You get stopped, and because the computer says no and you can't produce a certificate on the spot, they take your car away?
Talk about a police state.
|
|
That's the long and short of it and for this reason I now have a photocopy of my insurance certificate reduced by 50% with me at all times. Eagle Star used to do a credit card sized certificate which came with your paperwork - maybe more companies should do similar?
|
|
Appears to be an Europe-wide campaign. Spain has just deployed mobile ANPR vans which are linked to the insurance companies' database. However only 94% of policies are on the database; but there is a requirement that you carry originals, or certified copies, of insurance docs., including the receipt of payment of annual premium. Reckoned there are 400,000 vehicles without insurance here. Fine for no insurance is 1500 euros and possible impounding.
|
"That's the long and short of it and for this reason I now have a photocopy of my insurance certificate reduced by 50% with me at all times"
A certificate only shows that you paid a premium (or the first payment), it doesn't mean the vehicle is actually insured now. There's plenty of people that get a cert then cancel, or don't pay their monthly instalments, but keep the certificate. So if the computer says no, and they can't get hold of the insurance company, what happens then? They steal your car? Ha, guilty until proved innocent, I guess.
Whenever I've tried to get hold of mine to progress a claim or tell them about vehicle changes, I could never get through. Maybe the police have a 'hot line' to them all.
|
"A certificate only shows that you paid a premium "
And when you no longer need the certificate you are obliged to return it.
|
|
|
|
|
Its nothing to do with ANPR itself. It has been around as a technology for quite some time.
The real empowerment [for Police] came when they updated legislation allowing Officers to seize vehicles a the roadside which were not insured and also issuing fixed penalty notices accordingly.
It is this seizure power that has made the difference not ANPR.
|
The Police don't have to take your car, its an option. They can still go through the 7 day production process and if after further inquiries the vehicle is found not to be covered they can go to a place they reasonably suspect the vehicle to be and enter by force if necessary any place other than a dwelling area to seize the vehicle.
So if you can get your car in the living room its safe. :-)
|
The use of ANPR and other methods of detecting motorists driving unlawfully have been proving very successful for some time now in the area in which I live.
Edited by Stuartli on 12/02/2008 at 00:19
|
|
it would be extremely simple for Mr Oik to purchase some dodgy car insurance from an internet source that is not at all accurate i.e. give a date of birth that makes him 60 yrs of age and state he has no convictions, accidents etc....insurance gets issued and although no use to man nor beast in a claim...importantly, it would not show up as a negative on an ANPR sweep
|
|
In the Bradford area after coming bottom of the list as far as uninsured drivers are concerned the proposed clampdown has resulted in nothing because the areas most likely to have uninsured drivers are no go areas for police so nothing ever gets done ,untaxed cars can be parked at the roadside and main roads at that for months on end and nothing is everdone so when I here about clampdowns I just laugh until you have the German system or similar of registrations and insurance the matter will get worse as it is and not better.
|
To repeat something I posted a while back
Motorists with insurance are having their cars seized by mistake due to not being shown on the magic list and having to pay to get their cars back - FACT. Several cases involving Merseyside and Lancashire Police forces discussed on BBC radio phone late last year.
If you enter in to an agreement with an insurance provider and pay the correct amount, why should you be chasing around to make sure you are on the magic list to avoid the unlawful seizure of your vehicle ?
|
|
Keep the insurance doc in the car and its not a problem.
|
|
A good reason for buying your car tax online. If the transaction goes through, you know your car is on the database as insured.
|
But this is maybe a prompt for us all to either carry copies of documentation as has already been suggested, or, in my case, dig out the paperwork to at least find out which company each is insured with!
I tend to swap at renewals and to be honest, and I am ashamed to admit this, I am not sure who each car is with!
Priority No.1 when I get home tonight! And if I don't know, then SWMBO probably doesn't even know the make of the car she is driving!
|
|
|
Car broken in to and document or copy gone.....
Wasn't it Nazi germany who had the idea of making it's citizens carry wads of documentation with them every where the went ?
You are all missing the point. It is not up to us to be constantly proving ourselves innocent. It is up to those that wish to confer guilt to do so with fail safe evidence.
Having your details missed off the magic list because some fresh from school office clerk went out for an early lunch instead of finishing off that mornings batch of new insurance policies , thus leading to the costly removal of your vehicle, is just not on in my view.
|
My certificate of insurance from Zurich is credit card sized and is carried on my person at all times (there is a separate standard paper version).
|
From the first post of "30 to 40 cars a day" - that must be peanuts from the figures that keep appearing of xx% of cars are uninsured.
I put the phone number and policy number of my insurance into my mobile phone to keep the details handy.
|
In Ireland (Republic of), they have 3 tax disc-style certificates to display in the windscreen - one for tax, one for roadworthiness (ie MoT) and one for insurance. I don't know how easy they are to forge though...
I agree that it is outrageous if owners are required to pay for the return of erroneously impounded cars. That sounds like extortion in a very literal sense...
|
|
A good reason for buying your car tax online. If the transaction goes through you know your car is on the database as insured.
>>
Until renewal of insurance and there is a delay in updating the database
>>My certificate of insurance from Zurich is credit card sized and is carried on my person at all times (there is a separate standard paper version).
I hope other companies copy this.
>>I put the phone number and policy number of my insurance into my mobile phone to keep the details handy.
Thanks for that idea. A belt and braces approach.
If you are stopped and you are not on the database, if you have the details but not the certificate with you, will the BiB phone your insurance company?
|
|
|
|
|
In the Bradford area >> are no go areas for police so nothing ever gets done untaxed cars can be parked at the roadside and main roads at that for months >>
What happened when you wrote to:-
your local chief of police;
your MP;
The Minister for Transport (or whatever he is called);
your local newspaper;
your national newspaper;
The Sun
|
|
|
|
|
Brought a smile to my face the other day to see a number of high spec luxury cars parked up by the docks in Liverpool, covered in 'Vehicle Seized - No Insurance' stickers... The kids had already started letting the tyres down too.
Although I can't help but feel those cars were probably bought with cash and replaced in the same way by people who don't really care about the law.
|
"From the first post of "30 to 40 cars a day" - that must be peanuts from the figures that keep appearing of xx% of cars are uninsured."
Estimated 10000 in Bradford MDC alone
|
>> Estimated 10000 in Bradford MDC alone
>>
May I refer to my response to your earlier post?
|
I always carry a copy of my Insurance Certificate in glovebox for emergencies. After all, what happens in a crash and you need to exchange details?
As for uninsured cars, I cannot do anything. But untaxed ones I see, I report... and local police do action it.
People who complain should start by complaining to the police...
|
So you are stopped.
The reason given is that BiB has APNR information that the vehicle is uninsured.
You produce your Copy Certificate and say all in order.
BiB phones MIB and they say "Sorry Insurance invalid"
Under legislation that gives him power to seize.
Regrettably this has happened and will continue to do so. How can MIB come up with a fool proof system. Doubt if they can.
But I would hope that BiB would carry out some deep interrogation and may be obtain a confession that vehicle was not insured or if still claim made then RT/1 and further follow up with Insurance Co concerned. Bear in mind some will falsely swear black is blue which is why BiB is cynical at times.
dvd
|
You should not have to sue your insurance company for the costs incurred if your vehicle is wrongly seized. Police blame insurers, insurers refuse to budge and mean while your car is clocking up a storage fee on a daily basis. This has happened and is happening on a weekly basis.
|
It's like everything else though isn't it, trying to achieve a happy medium.
If you allowed eveyone to do what they wanted to there'd be anarchy, so there are checks in place which can be inconvenient, to prevent the lowest life from from badly affecting everyone else
If the benefit of preventing the very high current figures for 'no insurance' is some potential roadside weariness due to a junior clerk not inputting some data, then so be it. Most people, with good humour, common sense and intelligence could talk their way out of any difficulties, however sarcasm and stroppiness will inevitably cause a potential problem...
|
Question for the knowledgeable members above, how much of the time are we talking just no insurance? I would have thought that at least some of the time you would also be talking no tax and/or no MOT.
Edited by Webmaster on 13/02/2008 at 00:40
|
|
|
'roadside weariness !! "
the bloke I heard on the radio phone in had forked out storage and removal fees to the tune of £290. He had spent monies on taxis getting home and to work as well as to the place that his car had been taken to. £290 out of your pocket because of some insurance clerks mistake. That is banana republic justice and I for one don't want it.
|
What happened when you wrote to:-
your local chief of police;
your MP;
The Minister for Transport (or whatever he is called);
your local newspaper;
your national newspaper;
The Sun
Well I didn't write to the Sun but the aswer to the others is absolutely nothing.
|
So, if I have read some people's posts correctly the plod shouldn't be using the system as it has flaws which mean that in a very small percentage of cases the info is wrong - this despite the fact that there are probably millions of uninsured/taxed vehicles out there with the capacity to cause mayhem to us honest drivers' premiums and general health?? Oh boy!
All that needs doing is for the insurance companies to agree that if a car is correctly insured but not on the datatbase they pay any reasonable costs incurred by the owner if the car is impounded...
And in the mean time lets encourage said plod to remove as many uninsured cars as possible from the roads for the general good of the rest of us.....
Might even reduce congestion!!
|
|
'All that needs doing is for the insurance companies to agree that if a car is correctly insured but not on the datatbase they pay any reasonable costs incurred by the owner if the car is impounded...' couldn't agree more but so far, every case I have read of , they have steadfastly refused to meet the costs incurred through wrongful seizure following the non appearance of insurance details on the data base, claiming it was up to the individual concerned to check the data base themselves.
|
If there's any doubt, you get a producer.
If the system is wrong, then you don't pay.
ANPR picks up hundreds of cars on 07/57 plates that show as no insurance. They generally get ignored 'on the balance of probabilities'.
Strangely enough, there aren't queues of people who hold valid insurance waiting outside recovery compounds.
|
'If the system is wrong, then you don't pay'
Not true.
Contact Roger Phillips on the Radio Merseyside lunch time phone in. he's had at least two case in the last 8 months in which drivers had their cars seized and where left to both make their own way home ( one had a wife and kids with him ) and then pay up to recover their cars. Their pleas to the police forces involved and insurance companies fell on deaf ears. I also recall another bloke, a taxi driver, having the same problem in the Midlands. he stood firm for a week but was losing so much income he caved in and paid up.
If you got a fine for not having a TV licence when you clearly had one, would you just pay it ?
|
|
As someone who seizes numerous cars a week, I'll bow to your greater experience because you heard it on the radio.
Edited by midlifecrisis on 13/02/2008 at 12:40
|
The Chief Con of the force concerned appeared on the ' radio " to point out that although a mistake was made, his hands were tied once the vehicle was removed to a secure compound. He sympathised but said it was then a matter between the Insurers and the vehicle removal people as to whether the due fees were removed. Neither would give ground in the matter.
The system will gain my respect but only when an innocent victim doesn't end up some £200 out of pocket , having committed no offence.
|
My 2 cents worth:
It is not the Police's responsibility to ensure the accuracy of the MIB database. If your insurance company gets it wrong and you are "inconvenienced", then it is entirely a matter between you and your Insurer. You have recourse to the Law to make them pay for the "damages" you have suffered as a result of their incompetence.
And we all now have access to check the MIB data, there is no excuse.
Happy now? So there. Just my 2 cents worth.
Edited by jbif on 13/02/2008 at 13:30
|
Neither is it the responsibility of the person who purchases the insurance to make sure they are any any number of lists..
How many ordinary people can afford the costs of launching a case in the courts to get their money back ?
|
Neither is it the responsibility of the person who purchases the insurance..
Sorry mate, tough luck, but it is. This country has got too used to the "social" providing everything for them.
Now you know, so you had better check yours.
Edited by jbif on 13/02/2008 at 13:38
|
|
So having bought and paid for my Insurance, I must be on and off the internet, checking that I am still on some magical list in order to avoid having my car seized. Stalin would have been proud to lead this country.
|
|
I can't see any reference in the above posts to the website where you can check you are listed - so here it is, www.askmid.com
|
The Chief Con of the force concerned appeared on the ' radio " to point out that although a mistake was made his hands were tied once the vehicle was removed to a secure compound. He sympathised but said it was then a matter between the Insurers and the vehicle removal people as to whether the due fees were removed.
The Police shouldn't be outsourcing their vehicle removal and storage to third party companies then. If impounding vehicles are part of their lawful duties, then they should have an internal department to do it, that doesn't charge the public for its 'services'.
|
If impounding vehicles are part of their lawful duties, then they should have an internal department to do it, that doesn't charge the public for its 'services'.
You have just proves my point made above: "This country has got too used to the "social" providing everything for them". I say give free bus and train passes to every voter, i.e. everyone from the age of 18. No need for cars then in USSofUK !
|
Our local force were doing ANPR checks tonight. Slow moving dual carriageway so no way out once on it. A 106 3 cars in front of me was pulled and my wife came home saying an A2 she was following was also pulled.
We went out a little later on the same stretch of road and both the above cars were being loaded onto a wagon. There were also another 4 parked up which I presume were to be taken to the compound.
|
You have just proves my point made above: "This country has got too used to the "social" providing everything for them". I say give free bus and train passes to every voter i.e. everyone from the age of 18. No need for cars then in USSofUK !
My main point was that innocent drivers are being stung for these removal and storage charges, and the excuse is that the police can do nothing about refunds because they've contracted out the services to private firms. If that's the case then the police should have their own department to do this that does have the flexibility to refund charges if the motorist is innocent, or the police should pay the charges. I'm all for insurance and tax dodgers having to pay removal and storage fees, but don't penalise the honest motorists.
|
Last bit of research I read suggested that 1 in 8 car details were incorrect on MID. There was a stopping and checking thingummy up north and details on the DVLA were also checked. The DVLA database was found to be even more inaccurate. The dvla had the chassis number of one of my cars incorrect as it was queried on the MOT when it first went computerised.
To combat issues with fake address details etc would it not be better if all car ownership registrations had to be done at local post office with copies of ID? The DVLA could still process them but the PO could actually check the person and send off the details. If someone had just moved house then they'd need to provide ID from their old address and some proof that they were living at their new address eg utility bill. They would then have to provide proof of insurance before they would be allowed to register the car at the new one. You could also insist payment was done with a cheque or card to link to a specific bank account rather than allowing cash or postal order payments which aren't traceable. You could also verify with the bank that the old and new address matched up to their records.
The same could also be done for change of address on driving licence details as I think it would be better to have an actual human talk to the person doing the change as you'd then get a much better idea of what was going on. There also should be some special system for frequent movers eg travellers to have their vehicles properly registered and insured rather than just letting them get away with not bothering. If they can afford BMW x5s they can afford to be legit.
|
|
|
|
