Caught with no car insurance
- Thread starter seebin
- Start date
As @mathepac has pointed out, these are all the responsibility of the driver and/or owner. No road tax is the least of your problems.
Last edited:
That's interesting because the guard who pulled me over said it would likely be a fine and points. I spoke to another solicitor and she said 95% of cases in a first offence that she's witnessed concludes with points and a fine and no disqualification. Unless you've been aggressive or disruptive with the guard. Sounds like you have a different experience of this??
What I mean is that having no road tax, does not carry the same possible penalties that being convicted of no insurance carries.
That vehicle not being taxed does not have the possibility of :-
from Citizens advice,
If you drive while uninsured, you could be fined up to €5000 and get 5 penalty points. You could also go to prison for up to 6 months. The judge may decide to disqualify you from driving instead of giving you penalty points.
That is why I said:-
That vehicle not being taxed does not have the possibility of :-
from Citizens advice,
If you drive while uninsured, you could be fined up to €5000 and get 5 penalty points. You could also go to prison for up to 6 months. The judge may decide to disqualify you from driving instead of giving you penalty points.
That is why I said:-
Hi Seebin,
I am not a lawyer.
For the avoidance of doubt, it seems to me that what you did make a mistake in that when you rang your insurance company, you misunderstood what was said.
However, having no insurance should be seen as a continuum which has reckless dereliction of the law, over an extended period, at one end of this spectrum and a simple, once-off, short-lived misunderstanding at the other. Any penalties should be proportionate to the offence and should not be a case of one size fits all. I wish you well and really hope that any penalty that you do get reflects all the mitigating circumstances which you have outlined.
One stray thought - is it possible to get a recording of your conversation with the insurer? - as its content may be useful for evidential or other purposes.
Best of luck.
I am not a lawyer.
For the avoidance of doubt, it seems to me that what you did make a mistake in that when you rang your insurance company, you misunderstood what was said.
However, having no insurance should be seen as a continuum which has reckless dereliction of the law, over an extended period, at one end of this spectrum and a simple, once-off, short-lived misunderstanding at the other. Any penalties should be proportionate to the offence and should not be a case of one size fits all. I wish you well and really hope that any penalty that you do get reflects all the mitigating circumstances which you have outlined.
One stray thought - is it possible to get a recording of your conversation with the insurer? - as its content may be useful for evidential or other purposes.
Best of luck.
NoRegretsCoyote
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,766
This is an excellent idea. When you listen back you might find that they were to blame for at least some of the misunderstanding. If it doesn't support you then you wouldn't have to rely on it in court.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't think the OP said he had any conversation with his insurer ?
BTW, I think that the path that this thread appears to be heading down is not a path that I would support.
*Looking for 'loopholes' or other excuses to try to mitigate the OP's lack of responsibility in ensuring he was legally driving is not, IMHO, something to be condoned.
Uninsured drivers are a scourge on the road and are an utter abomination.
NoRegretsCoyote
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,766
I think it's in the first post:
On your other point, the OP claimed to have had a good-faith misunderstanding with their insurer. It doesn't seem to be (on the basis of facts presented) a conscious attempt to avoid paying insurance.
That said, we are all just anonymous pseudonyms here so who knows what the truth is.
While I agree with you, in principal - this doesn't appear to be a person with no insurance.
Those with no insurance, full stop, deserve notable jail time, but that's not even close to the situation that we appear to have here - in this instance, we have someone who has paid for insurance, holds a policy, but has changed their car and run into a problem along the way.
My bad, you're absolutely right.
The fact that he had insurance on another vehicle is really not relevant. By his own admission, he was not insured to drive the car he was driving at the time of being stopped. He admits to 'misinterpreting' what his insurer told him, so we can only assume he was in fact told he was not insured in his new car.
Because motor insurance is so important, it is paramount that every motorist ensures, beyond any doubt, that they are covered at all times in whatever vehicle they are driving.
I agree as you say 'on the facts presented' however I suspect it could well be, 'sure I'll take a chance...'. But that's an assumption.
As I said before, the Judge will have heard every excuse 'in the book'.
The outcome may well rest on how the case is presented and without doubt the Judge's humour on the day.
Incorrect.
Registration of change of ownership takes place when the data is entered.
Change of ownership takes place when ownership is transferred to the the new owner, by the existing owner or a person deemed to be acting on behalf of the existing owner. A declaration to this effect is made and the date is entered in the VRC and is signed by the seller and the new owner.
The process is slightly different if buying from a registered dealer but the date of ownership is not dependant on when it is registered.
Last edited:
I thought you own the car when you buy it? As in when you become the beneficial owner? Not the date when it’s transferred or registered into your name.
Anyways I’m going to be pleading guilty. I don’t want to muddy the waters and just admit it was a mistake, which it was. I didn’t knowingly drive the car uninsured or ‘chance my arm’. I’ll pay a price for this, I just don’t want it to be a driving ban.
Anyways I’m going to be pleading guilty. I don’t want to muddy the waters and just admit it was a mistake, which it was. I didn’t knowingly drive the car uninsured or ‘chance my arm’. I’ll pay a price for this, I just don’t want it to be a driving ban.
With somewhat differing degrees of possible consequences, I'm sure you would agree.Well, we all can make genuine mistakes, right?
I find it somewhat amusing, the 'ambience' of purgation creeping in here.
I wonder would these posters display the same benevolence if say, they were driving home in their brand new car and an uninsured driver ploughs into the back of their shiny new 'pride and joy'. Absolutely destroys it and, putting possible death/injury to their family/passengers aside, then says , "I thought I had insurance but I actually don't".
I very much doubt the answer would be along the lines of "Ah that's a pity, sure you have a policy on another car. Good man, easy mistake to make".
That is EXACTLY what I have been stating, and is fact, but it was argued.
Last edited:
How dare they!
PaddyBloggit
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,745
I always ask for an email confirmation to be sent on... so that I have something in writing and also something to show a garda if I'm stopped.
An arguable case is there to say that the op was not the owner at the time of the stop and that the car was given on goodwill terms by the garage as the terms of sale had not yet been completed. (certificate of trade in not provided)
Garage was not taking a risk in transferring ownership until they had the trade in registration documents.
If the Garda issues the summons, surely they will have to check registration details? And that will show that the op did not own the car on that date.
So I'd be saying that I had the car on goodwill terms from the garage, but they would not transfer ownership to me until I had given them the registration documents of my trade in.
Hence you were insured to drive.
If you know what station the Garda is based in, you could try and talk to them and show this and see if they accept that you were insured.
Garage was not taking a risk in transferring ownership until they had the trade in registration documents.
If the Garda issues the summons, surely they will have to check registration details? And that will show that the op did not own the car on that date.
So I'd be saying that I had the car on goodwill terms from the garage, but they would not transfer ownership to me until I had given them the registration documents of my trade in.
Hence you were insured to drive.
If you know what station the Garda is based in, you could try and talk to them and show this and see if they accept that you were insured.
As above, registration of a change in ownership and the actual change in ownership are two different events. It is not uncommon for the registration to take place days later.