Charged with driving no insurance

[harrythestig]

Charged with driving with no insurance. Date of offence is the day i was caught speeding (by 12mph and it was not deliberate Im not a reckless driver). This was 1st March. Actually, i did have insurance as a named driver on my parents car. But the insurance company voided the policy later on 15th March.

I know its not a defence, strict liability means im going to be convicted but can anyone give me advice on how to present mitigating circumstances with my guilty by post plea? I dont want to go to court but is it better to? I couldnt find information on driving with no insurance charges where the policy was voided (after date of offence).

[dotty.]

How can you have not been insured on march 1st then? Mond you I think the insirance company do give you a couple of weeks notice if for any reason they are altering your policy, so were your parents not insured after the 15th? How and when did you find out , did your parents ask for you to be taken off the policy?

[NOX]

My understanding is that just as insurance cannot be' backdated' to cover you, it can't be backdated to ' uncover' you either. I thihnk you might find you were legally insured at the time, as if it wasn't voided until the 15th then all drivers should have been insured until then.

[ummmm]

http://www.theanswerb.../Question1000503.html

[dotty.]

Plus I don't think 'void' is the right term, surely you mean 'cancelled', unless for some reason the information the insurers had been given was inaccurate and it came to light when the police did a MID check.

[dotty.]

I thought it sounded familiar ummmm

[New Judge]

I’m afraid, NOX, that insurers can and do retrospectively cancel policies if they believe that there was false or misleading information provided at the time of the proposal or if material differences (e.g. convictions) have occurred since cover began and they have not been disclosed.

Chris gave some valuable advice in response to your first question concerning the details the insurers must hold of the changeover they allege was made. If what they say is untrue not only do you have mitigation to offer the court but you have a defence against the charge. You need to get to the bottom of this without delay. You need to find out precisely why cover was cancelled and ask for evidence to support this. Otherwise you might as well plead guilty and offer no mitigation. (In practice, because of the “absolute” nature of the offence there is very little mitigation available for the offence anyway and if the insurers’ version of events is true there is nothing you can say in your defence).

You must find out why cover was discontinued forthwith.

[harrythestig]

ive asked the insurers - they say we were fronting. That means they can void the policy - not cancelled - voided, which means my ins cover was non existent. So if i plead guilty is it mitigation to ppoint out that cover was removed later? will it result in reduced fine? (sorry for repeating question but the prev was posted when i didnt know what the situation was and was becoming more and more confused. YOu can delete that one)

[ummmm]

If the insurance company think you were fronting I think you'll have to prove you wasn't. Like NJ said...driving with no insurance is an absolute offence. It's down to you to make sure that what you are doing is 100% agreed by the insurance company.

Going by your other question it does sound as if you were fronting though..

[dotty.]

what is fronting?

[boxtops]

Saying that a more experienced driver is the main driver, dotty, when it's not true - it's illegal.

[New Judge]

Now we know the full story. No Harry, you have no mitigation and your explanation will not result in a lower fine or a reduction from the minimum of six penalty points. Essentially a false declaration was made at the time of the proposal which is the proposer's fault. If it does anything it aggravates the offence.

[harrythestig]

NewJudge- i understand but honestly had no idea about this and i did not know the reasons for the policy being voided until now. I have never, since i started driving, ever dealt with the insurance, have always left to parents (doing so now though).

I guess i can expect 6-8 points? and a fine based on my income? is there anything i can do to make things better? And will the issue of fronting be brought up if i plead guilty by post as the insurance company has not bought it up with the court? someone told me ins companies rarely pursue that. any advice greatly appreciated

[New Judge]

You can explain why it was you had no insurance, Harry, but in my view it will make no difference.

The facts of the case will be heard by the magistrates. These could include the circumstances in which the policy was made void.

[realcleverclogs]

harrythestig sounds like a 'boy racer' admirer of Top Gear to me.
I'm surprised no one has wondered how 12mph over the speed limit is neither deliberate nor reckless. If the former, he's lucky not to be additionally summonsed for driving without due care by not being aware of his speed.
Was that 32mph in a 20 zone where there are likely to be children about, 42mph in a 30 zone an ordinary built up area, etc.? Speed limits are there for a reason even if we don't like or agree with them.

[bennhoughton]

the policy would have been voided "ab initio" by the insurer - which means cancelled from the beginning - ie no insurance was ever in force and no liability attaches to the insurer - they have proved that they would not have taken on the risk had they known all of your details - and it is your responsibility to ensure that you are insured correctly, hence driving with no insurance - essentially you committed fraud in the eyes of your insurer and so you can expect little sympathy from the court i would expect. sorry!

[ABerrant]

A road number prefixed with 'M' or suffixed '(M)' is, by definition, a motorway.

http://www.cbrd.co.uk/roadsfaq/#4

[ABerrant]

^ Sorry... answered on wrong thread!

[Old_Geezer]

Much as I tend to suspect. Anything that, to the layman, explains & mitigates, is used by authorities to insist it was worse than they thought. You'll just have to hope they'd had a good day up to when your case was heard.