Both our cars were showing insured on the database, but one of them had no details of vehicle.
I contacted NFU and enquired about it....sure enough a few days later the vehicle details came up correctly.
|
|
|
'...if it is not corrected send them a letter with proof of postage/delivery!'
Yet another example of 'Joe Public' having to take the initiative/do the spadework on behalf of a 'provider' in order to obtain a fundamental 'service' that they presumably paid a reasonably substantial sum for?
Whatever...
|
Once again, I provide you with this
tinyurl.com/njkgqy
Does owning and insuring a vehicle now mean you must have access to a computer and the internet in order to keep checking you are on the correct data base ?
Has any one received anything in writing from their motor insurers telling them it is their sole responsibility to check and ensure they are on the data base at all times ?
|
Its a 2 year old link the MID was in its infancy back then
|
Google the subject. Little has changed. An hour on the internet and you will have countless cases from across the Uk.
I'm told the Radio Merseyside lunch time phone in had some one talking about the latest wrongful seizure in it's area but I didn't hear the show.
Edited by Mr X on 14/07/2009 at 17:16
|
use a decent insurer is my answer then
ie one that updates as you reinsure
i can do my own via this link and they are updated onto the mid within 24 hours so im sure an insurer can update direct
the link
www.mma-insurance.com/MMA_Website/products/motor/m...x
Edited by bell boy on 14/07/2009 at 17:20
|
There really ought to be penalties for Insurers and compensation for drivers when this sort of mistake happens.
It can't be fair to the driver to play 100% by the rules, then have his car impounded, and have to pay the extortionate storage and release fees just because his insurer didn't update a database.
|
I'm insured with a very large well-known insurer. After changing cars recently it took them three weeks and several phone calls before they bothered to update the database.
I don't know if there's a 100% way of guaranteeing to Mr Plod at the roadside that you're insured. I've read too many stories now where an insurance certificate has been produced and not accepted.
One reason for this could be the scam where someone gets insured, waits for the paperwork to come through, and then cancels the insurance. Also nowadays, with a good quality printer it's easy to create a convincing looking insurance certificate.
One thing you could do is always have your insurance policy number on you, together with the phone number* of your insurance company. You (or the police) could then ring the company there and then to check you're covered.
* Make sure it's a phone number answered 24/7, not just their office-hours only number.
|
'* Make sure it's a phone number answered 24/7, not just their office-hours only number.'
Why don't insurers issue each customer with such a number seeing as how the chances of not being on the computer and having your car removed are higher today following the nationwide spread of ANPR ?
|
some of the telephone numbers provided by some companies to police forces to do their checks are mon - fri office hours only
like everything in life it's no doubt 'you get what you pay for'
I don't suppose many people would consider the 24 hour phone line, when checking for car insurance....i haven't up until now, maybe I will
|
Surely the claims number would be able to help, and they're normally open 24/7?
Am I missing something with that?
|
|
i'm thinking the insurance companies will only converse with the Old Bill via a police liaison or security type dept due to Data Protection type issues. I'm not convinced the police can ring the same number the customer can and then expect them to reel off the info they want. It's at the edges of my knowledge, so i'm presuming.
|
We had a 24/7 claims hotline in our breakdown control room for an affiliated insurer who had an office in our building. All we did was take details and phone number for them to ring the insured in office hours. No database details whatsoever....so no use for anyone to check validity.
Guilty until you prove yourself innocent.......happening more and more now.
Ted
|
Guilty until you prove yourself innocent.......happening more and more now.
The biggest problem is:
1) Found guilty on the spot (when there must often be no need for such heavy-handedness).
2) Penalty issued instantly (inconvenience, which can be great, + costs).
3) *No redress*.
The first and the last points especially get right up my nose. It's not the fault of the law. It's undeniably the fault of "the law".
|
Computerised policing....
Computer says NO . Little Britain- spot on.
|
1) Found guilty on the spot (when there must often be no need for such heavy-handedness).
What proportion of cars with no insurance showing on MID are allowed on their way with a producer when the driver has shown proof of identity etc?
What proportion of cars with no insurance showing on MID are actually being driven uninsured.
Are there any statistics on the real probability of an insured driver having a car seized?
Yes it happens but is it 1% of cars seized or what?
|
Are there any statistics on the real probability of an insured driver having a car seized? Yes it happens but is it 1% of cars seized or what?
who knows?
in many cases people wont know their not on MID until they get stopped.... it could be 0.0001% or 15% that are insured but not on MID..... That to me is the more important figure.....
I guess we will never know.
Edited by the swiss tony on 15/07/2009 at 11:58
|
|
Once the fuss over incorrectly seized cars started following some well publicised cases, a lot of police forces claimed not to have kept figures on this issue.
|
|
