|
|
Sept 28, 2021 15:44:21 GMT
|
Hmm. I had a friend who was in a similar situation, except no speeding.
There was some discussion whether twoc was relevant if the owner of the car claimed they were unaware the driver was using his car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 16:31:08 GMT
|
Speak to a driving offences solicitor.
Don't want to be that man , but-
You will not get a SA course due to the previous penalty but more for the no insurance.
In theory they could give penalty for speeding and no insurance and you can get banned on points tot up. The other thing to worry about is your mate can be liable for permitting the offence of driving without insurance. It is unusual for them to pursue these permitting offences,however these type of offences are considered absolute and the onus is on you to rebut them.
Some legal pleading required i'd say
SPEAK TO A DRIVING OFFENCES SPECIALIST SOLICITOR .... SOON!
Good luck
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 28, 2021 16:31:59 GMT by duggers
Needs a bigger hammer mate.......
|
|
paul99
Part of things
Posts: 410
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 16:34:04 GMT
|
Firstly IANAL
Possible argument if your insurer REMOVED the third party clause, or did you change insurer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 16:47:32 GMT
|
Speak to a driving offences solicitor. Don't want to be that man , but- You will not get a SA course due to the previous penalty but more for the no insurance. In theory they could give penalty for speeding and no insurance and you can get banned on points tot up. The other thing to worry about is your mate can be liable for permitting the offence of driving without insurance. It is unusual for them to pursue these permitting offences,however these type of offences are considered absolute and the onus is on you to rebut them. Some legal pleading required i'd say SPEAK TO A DRIVING OFFENCES SPECIALIST SOLICITOR .... SOON! Good luck Hi, I also hate to say this but the outcome of this could be down to your mate. If he has the choice of 'aiding and abetting' by letting you drive without insurance or saying you 'took without owners consent'. Which way do you think he will jump? Colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 16:51:07 GMT
|
Hi, I also hate to say this but the outcome of this could be down to your mate. If he has the choice of 'aiding and abetting' by letting you drive without insurance or saying you 'took without owners consent'. Which way do you think he will jump? Colin That is the very situation my friend was in. Ugly.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 28, 2021 19:58:08 GMT by Rich
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 19:43:26 GMT
|
If the offense penalty could lead to a ban you will have to attend court as the sentence is immediate, so you will need a solicitor to at least ensure your not railroaded.
However I believe some policies do allow unnamed drivers to be covered on the vehicle but they have an age limit.
|
|
retired with too many projects!
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 21:11:51 GMT
|
Speak to a driving offences solicitor. Don't want to be that man , but- You will not get a SA course due to the previous penalty but more for the no insurance. In theory they could give penalty for speeding and no insurance and you can get banned on points tot up. The other thing to worry about is your mate can be liable for permitting the offence of driving without insurance. It is unusual for them to pursue these permitting offences,however these type of offences are considered absolute and the onus is on you to rebut them. Some legal pleading required i'd say SPEAK TO A DRIVING OFFENCES SPECIALIST SOLICITOR .... SOON! Good luck Hi, I also hate to say this but the outcome of this could be down to your mate. If he has the choice of 'aiding and abetting' by letting you drive without insurance or saying you 'took without owners consent'. Which way do you think he will jump? Colin If a mate would drop you in it for taking without consent rather than taking the aiding and abetting charge, then better mates are needed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 28, 2021 21:20:58 GMT
|
Your mate can state that you told him your insurance covered you as you were FC. It would be really anal of the CPS to go for it as they will want an 'easy' win and don't look for an argument as it doesn't do their stats any good. CPS decide all charges based on the file submitted.
Get a specialist solicitor and they can plead technical guilty but with mitigation of the penalty based on your need to drive for work etc. If they accept it you will likely end up with points, a larger fine plus court costs as well as the cost of representation. This would be heard at magistrates court where a specialist brief will get a good chance of getting the mitigation over; you may keep your licence.
Get that legal advice!
|
|
Needs a bigger hammer mate.......
|
|
|
|
Sept 29, 2021 6:55:02 GMT
|
I know someone who faced a ban at 18 years old because they were doing 84 in a 40 zone and were in the driving probation period. He paid his Β£800 to a specialist solicitor and only got a 2 week ban due to work commitments. When he got his license back it was void of any points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 29, 2021 22:29:09 GMT
|
I know someone who faced a ban at 18 years old because they were doing 84 in a 40 zone and were in the driving probation period. He paid his Β£800 to a specialist solicitor and only got a 2 week ban due to work commitments. When he got his license back it was void of any points. Which solicitor did he use?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 6:41:40 GMT
|
Iβll ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 12:47:38 GMT
|
I know someone who faced a ban at 18 years old because they were doing 84 in a 40 zone and were in the driving probation period. He paid his Β£800 to a specialist solicitor and only got a 2 week ban due to work commitments. When he got his license back it was void of any points. Which solicitor did he use? This might be a back-to-font / unpopular opinion, but I'm not sure I really want people getting away with this sort of offence with such a lenient punishment, no matter how good / expensive their solicitor is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 13:28:07 GMT
|
Two words Katie price! Although it does appear that the op has made a genuine error/ oversight, as opposed to being a publicity hungry **** π€¬
Meaning - those with deep pockets will always get away with things, think David Beckham?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 14:36:49 GMT
|
I think what has happened here is a failure to read the small print at the right timeβ¦β¦ and there, but for the rare grace of fate go I.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone β¦β¦
As for the Price woman. Driving (well, attempting to and actually crashing) while very drunk/stoned/emotional and already banned. Not a very reasonable comparison IMO?
Nick
|
|
1967 Triumph Vitesse convertible (old friend) 1996 Audi A6 2.5 TDI Avant (still durability testing) 1972 GT6 Mk3 (Restored after loong rest & getting the hang of being a car again)
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 14:57:07 GMT
|
Hi, I also hate to say this but the outcome of this could be down to your mate. If he has the choice of 'aiding and abetting' by letting you drive without insurance or saying you 'took without owners consent'. Which way do you think he will jump? Colin If a mate would drop you in it for taking without consent rather than taking the aiding and abetting charge, then better mates are needed! You can turn that around and ask what kind of a mate would expect you to take a hit for you as well as lending you his car!
|
|
|
|
paul99
Part of things
Posts: 410
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 15:19:14 GMT
|
If a mate would drop you in it for taking without consent rather than taking the aiding and abetting charge, then better mates are needed! You can turn that around and ask what kind of a mate would expect you to take a hit for you as well as lending you his car! I'm assuming the mate, like the OP, assumed he was insured. Lent in good faith.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 15:25:05 GMT
|
I think what has happened here is a failure to read the small print at the right timeβ¦β¦ and there, but for the rare grace of fate go I. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone β¦β¦ As for the Price woman. Driving (well, attempting to and actually crashing) while very drunk/stoned/emotional and already banned. Not a very reasonable comparison IMO? Nick Exactly Nick! Wasn't supposed to be a comparison,(or a dig!) I was making the point that there's a world of difference between the real world, and those who seem to do exactly what they like and 'get away' with it. I have driven other cars on my policy too, which does include driving other cars, but I did remember, about an hour before I did, to check the small print!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 15:27:48 GMT
|
I've been in a similar situation, back when we actually had police on the road. My motorbike was held together with bailing string and cable ties. Rear tyre was bald and the front brake didn't work.
I pulled into the bus lane behind a police bike to avoid the traffic and he gave me a tug. This was before you were allowed to go up the bus lanes on motorbikes.
I got a producer, and when I went to the station it turned out I had no insurance. It had lapsed, and hadn't auto renewed.
Long and short of it was, I went to court. I pled my case and said that it was an oversight, it hadn't auto renewed and it wasn't like I'd never had insurance. They could see it was a genuine mistake and I got the lowest penalty they could give. No points and something like Β£100 fine.
Hopefully it'll work out for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 15:34:42 GMT
|
I'd say you might be worrying about nothing potentially.
Is the letter from the police just an automatic request sent on the basis that the driver wasn't the registered keeper?
Without knowing the full specifics my initial instinct would be to try to ignore it and see if it goes away. They can always ask you again if they're desperate and there's no penalty as far as I know for not replying to the first letter.
Your mate is best off saying he knows nothing about it and tell them to ask you the driver and not to elaborate further.
The speeding is fixed penalty unless you resist it. If you resist it firmly enough you can take it all the way to court for an argument (I did that and won) but if there's nothing unusual and you were caught bang to rights then probably best to fess up and take the speeding on the chin hoping the insurance issue can be wiggled out of. You'd have to cross your fingers they are happy with just a speeding ticket and you might get away with the other bit if you don't kick up a stink and sort it out quickly.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 30, 2021 15:49:45 GMT by ejenner
|
|
|
|
Sept 30, 2021 15:41:25 GMT
|
You can turn that around and ask what kind of a mate would expect you to take a hit for you as well as lending you his car! I'm assuming the mate, like the OP, assumed he was insured. Lent in good faith..... Probably yes... but I just object to the idea that he would be a bad mate because he didn't want to join you in your punishment for your foolish actions. He lent the car and nobody really bothered to check the insurance situation because the car was showing as insured. Hadn't accounted for the possibility of a speeding fine turning into an insurance enquiry! I view it as two people getting in trouble needlessly for the actions of one person when only one person has to cop for it.
|
|
|
|
|