Uninsured - again!

[Adnyl]

Friend had insurance for van and insurance for car with same company. Van off the road, so called to cancel that insurance, keep insurance on the car. Job done. (same policy numbers for both). Driving car, believing it to be insured, and was followed home by police who said they had checked and car was uninsured. Policy document with valid insurance duly produced. Police checked again and said they believed car not insured. Car impounded. This was at night, to cut long story short, in the morning it was confirmed with insurers that the wrong insurance was cancelled. Van still insured, car uninsured. I have read some replies here and I don't want abuse, he knows the offence is absolute, he is guilty. Mortified, but guilty. He has now had a summons to go to Court. My question is -is there anything he can say in mitigation, and also, should the police officer not have cautioned him as he had checked whilst following him home that there was no insurance, so he knew an offence had been/ was likely to have been/ committed? The officer's statement has huge gaps in it, too, and could not have been based on any contemporaneous notes as it is inaccurate. Any (constructive!!) thoughts? No fixed penalty offered and no Notice of intended prosecution, nothing heard from March to June, when summons came.

[jno]

everything you've said can be used in mitigation; any letters, emails or notes of phone calls to the insurers will come in handy backing up the story. Won't stop him being guilty but might quite reasonably lower any penalty imposed. I wouldn't waste time trying to attack the police unless any inaccuracies are serious.

[NORMANTHEDOG]

panic button,i think your right.

[Ethel]

It would help if he could prove his case by producing a valid SORN for the van at the relevant date.

[Adnyl]

Thanks for your opinions. He has rooted out all insurances back to 2002, to show he was always covered, and has a perfectly clean licence for 30 years. He's got the SORN, and all his bank statements going back years to show insurance was always paid. The D/D would have shown at the end of the month and he would have noticed then that the wrong insurance had been cancelled, but had still been driving for 11 days without. I just want to point out that you can be the most meticulous, law-abiding person in the world, but in this day and age with Call Centres and on-line banking and what -have -you, it really could happen to anybody. He can only thank God that nothing awful happened in those 11 days. 30 years of careful, legal motoring would have counted for nothing. He is not going to attack the police, annoyed as he is, he is only hoping to show the Magistrates that he doesn't need a deterrent sentence, as it has never happened before, and will not, now, EVER happen again, he'll be paranoid. He is not an avoider, or a daredevil, or a risk taker. It was a mistake by his Insurance Company, but he is culpable, and he knows that. I will let you know how he goes on.

[Panic Button]

Yep Norm

[Adnyl]

Panic button and Norm, I don't understand what you mean?

[Panic Button]

Oh I think you do!

[Adnyl]

No, I am sorry, I do not. I have looked at the site and thought it a good one, and I wondered if any body could help my friend in what I thought might have been a heavy-handed approach from police, and/or a breach of PACE or something. I really don't understand what you mean, I am sorry if I am missing a joke or being niaive. I can assure you that this was a genuine question in a genuine case and I only wanted some help or an expectation of what might happen to him. Sorry if I am being thick.

[Loosehead]

This is a clear case of incompetance by the insurance company. You may well get prosecuted but consider also that you do have a case to sue for negligence and therefore damages. Do your IC know about this yet? Could you possibly get hold of the recording of the transaction?

[NORMANTHEDOG]

i cant understand how both policies had the same number,does not sound right to me.two seperate policies,should have two numbers.

[Adnyl]

Again, thanks to Loosehead. He is getting all his evidence together to show it was not his fault, and was a one-off blip, and I daresay when this is all over, he will be onto Norwich Union and will give them hell to pay. But he was the driver and the vehicle wasn't insured, and that's that, no matter what went wrong. Have since found out he didn't have to be Cautioned as he wasn't detained and questioned. Which reallly was my original query. Also have found out that the copper who stopped him had "a range of options" as to how to deal with the situation, but chose to prosecute. Have been told that the Court will be aware of that range of options, and may take a dim view that none of the options were pursued, which were put in place to save court time. Under the circs, we can only wait and see.
I will post to give an outcome, out of courtesy. Thanks to all who read and gave advice.

[Mel_C]

just to answer NORMANTHEDOG's last entry, yes it is possible to have multi vehicle policies (more than 1 vehicle insured under the same policynumber).

[kendunlop]

It all depends, who cancelled the wrong insurance, you or the insurance company. If you called an insurance company direct, ask them to listen to the call or calls you made to confirm what was said (you know the line, "Your call may be recorded!! - well ALL calls are recorded for vericfication in such instances). If they cannot trace the call. they must accept it was their fault, and the underwriters will issue a "letter of indemnity" on request.

[Adnyl]

Thanks to all for your suggestions, most of which he did, and got a pack together for the magistrates. It was heard yesterday, he got 6 points (inevitable, I suppose) �35 fine and �40 costs, so it wasn't too bad after all, they could see it wasn't a deliberate act, and treated him quite kindly.
I think he is now pursuing the insurance company with gusto!!