Just been pulled.

[timwilky]

So there I am driving home in the van from a visit to the quacks. As I pass a local hotel I notice a traffic unit parked up in the car park. Next thing there are blue behind me.

I have done nothing wrong so as there are traffic islands in the middle of the road I carry on trying not to impede him till he can overtake. Instead of carrying on though he stops in front of me, gets out and says I needed you to pull into Dantes do a U turn and follow me.

So parks up. Have I any documents? No my wallet is at home. Is it my van? yes. What is in it nothing. He looks over my shoulder to confirm it is empty. Have a seat in the car.

Impressive, when he manages to get a radio link for his system, within seconds they know the van is moted, insured etc. I have given them my name/address as it pops up on their screen so to make sure they ask me for date of birth.

Then out and it is a VOSA check. He gives it a quick once over as he already knows the MOT was only a couple of weeks ago, but still tyres, lights, wipers, suspension springs etc.


All the above I have no problem with. Any initiative that may reduce unlicensed, uninsured, unroadworthy vehicles I support. But next.

Some woman from the local council, name, address, employment status, what benefits I am on. BENEFITS grrrrhh NONE I must pay for everyone else. What right has a total stranger on the street got to ask me personal information even though I have nothing to hide. The van is my own property. It is not an indication of employment.

My rant at her for this probably means she is going to phone her office and check my address against their database to discover apart from paying the council my rates I have no other dealings with them.

Bloody jobsworth.

[ClunkintheUK]

Eh, Where did the woman from the council come from?

[ClunkintheUK]

I mean physically. I am aware or the tautology in my previous post. You know what i mean.

[timwilky]

She was there with them on the pub car park where they were bringing vehicles into.

half a dozen traffic, a few VOSA, transporters (both car and bike) and a couple wearing council T shirts.



I guess they were trying to get people who are working and claiming housing benefit or something like that. But as I said in my rant. Driving a personal van is no indication of it being a work vehicle.

Incidentally as I carried on home. I noticed a few bike cops lurking on the side roads as well. I thought my local police only used bikes when the football was on and they needed escorts.

[Dicky Ticker]

Nothing unusual in all these checks by VOSA on a commercial vehicle and driver.A van no matter how small is classified as commercial. The vehicle was MOT'd recently but it could have suffered a cut tyre, broken windscreen or other damage since. MOT's are only an indication of roadworthiness at the time of examination and it is up to the individual or company to maintain the standards set by VOSA on ANY vehicle including motorbikes.
A lot of small vans are insured as private but used for trade purposes or delivering small parcels which is illegal.Likewise people hire vehicles for trade use without operators licenses.
You would be surprised how many offenders are caught in VOSA checks and vehicles impounded, people working casual while claiming benefits,and outstanding warrants are not in the least uncommon.

As a haulage contractor it is weekly occurrence.

[timwilky]

Even though it is only used for private use. I have full business insurance.

As I said in my initial post, I have no issue with any initiatives that take out wrong vehicles/drivers.

I just cannot understand how a road policing operation should also have council benefits involved?

Actually I was surprised not to have had the tank dipped.

[Owenski]

Lol I was just about to ask if they dipped the tank.
Seems to be a popular thing for them currently.

Cant fault it, and cant fault your attitude Tim :thumbsup: I bet they were slightly relieved to have someone who didnt kick off with all the checks. Well until the council lady weighed in but I recon I'd have gotten my back up a bit at that point as well.

[Spank86]

I guess they were trying to get people who are working and claiming housing benefit or something like that. But as I said in my rant. Driving a personal van is no indication of it being a work vehicle.

for future reference you're under no obligation to deal with anyone except the police (and anyone from VOSA with regards to the van).

Once the police have done you can leave with or without answering additional questions.

[Bibio]

and the inland revenue/customs

i would have told the council to bolt. they have no power to interrogate.

[timwilky]

My son has just turned up, not happy.

He got pulled in his firms van. He has worked for them as a delivery driver for about 1 month. Turns out they have not added him to the insurance. His boss says he has told the brokers. But they haven't done it.

He has been charged with driving uninsured. But they confirm he is now on the insurance as a result of his boss talking to the insurers etc so was able to drive it away.

his boss is saying he will pay the fine, but 6 points on a drivers licence does well for job prospects. He can argue it in court. but facts are facts. At the point he was stopped he hadn't got cover.

[Brettus]

Yikes, so it is the individuals responsibility to make sure the company have made them legal to drive their vehicles? wonder how many actually do (I sure haven't)

[timwilky]

That is why I have a copy of my employers certificate.

[Spank86]

My son has just turned up, not happy.

He got pulled in his firms van. He has worked for them as a delivery driver for about 1 month. Turns out they have not added him to the insurance. His boss says he has told the brokers. But they haven't done it.

He has been charged with driving uninsured. But they confirm he is now on the insurance as a result of his boss talking to the insurers etc so was able to drive it away.

his boss is saying he will pay the fine, but 6 points on a drivers licence does well for job prospects. He can argue it in court. but facts are facts. At the point he was stopped he hadn't got cover.

You might want to check with a lawyer on that one since it could potentially double his insurance but I'm pretty(well a little bit anyway) sure that if you can prove your son had a reasonable belief that he was covered (I.E. directly Informed this was the case by his boss..) then he may have a defence.

[ClunkintheUK]

Can't offer any advice on that one, but I would be hitting the roof. The fine is usually the least of the worries when it comes to these things. I'd be pretty peeved if i was his boss too.

How many people would have the clout to get a copy of the insurance docs from their employer? I know you do Tim, but you are also pretty upfront with your boss and quite senior.

[cheesypeeps]

Is the employer getting charged with causing and permitting?

[nikon70]

gosh, you know I've never checked either with the places I have ridden for, always taken it as I have been insured...

i think it's a case for a legal professional to step in, might still have to take the 6 points as he WAS driving without insurance BUT might be able to sue the firm for some breach of contract (ie. not insuring him) and compensation for increased insurance costs for <insert how many years points stay on your licence> etc... stress etc...

[wyrdness]

My son has just turned up, not happy.

He got pulled in his firms van. He has worked for them as a delivery driver for about 1 month. Turns out they have not added him to the insurance. His boss says he has told the brokers. But they haven't done it.

He has been charged with driving uninsured. But they confirm he is now on the insurance as a result of his boss talking to the insurers etc so was able to drive it away.

his boss is saying he will pay the fine, but 6 points on a drivers licence does well for job prospects. He can argue it in court. but facts are facts. At the point he was stopped he hadn't got cover.

Tim,

This might be of interest:
http://www.motordefencelawyers.co.uk/motoring-news/driving-without-insurance-making-a-mistake/

[nikon70]

that's a good find!

i think the key bit here is the "misled in someway to believe that you were insured or there was no way of you knowing that you weren’t insured"

[Red Herring]

Tim, there is only one defence to driving without insurance, and your son may well be able to avail himself of it. Tell him not to pay any ticket but to get legal advice quick.

As long as the vehicle belonged to his boss, he was on the firms business and he had no reason to believe he wasn't insured he should be OK.

[timwilky]

His problem is he is absolutely skint. No work since Christmas and he get a job on the 3 am paper delivery to the shops for 175 quid a week for 3 hours a day, 7 days a week. which really means 4 hours as you have to go back and wait to be unloaded in your own time. So paying a solicitor is going to be hard work for him.

The vehicle belongs to his boss, He had permission to be using it for personal use when he was pulled. TBH, my son who has spent far too much time in my company and is a snob is dismissive of the people he works with saying they are all cash in hand benefit claimants. My son has the reverse problem that having been self employed for a few years is entitled to nothing when he finds there is no longer building work out there. So I am guessing his "employer" who is paying unreceipted cash to my son, is a tad fly.

I have only ever worked for large multinationals and whilst you can assume when you drive their vehicles, you are legit. In recent years my employers as a matter of course have provided me with a copy of the insurance certificate.

My lad, however has learning difficulties. But he has got on with life, but is far too trusting. But he like many (I guess) has assumed because your boss gives you a set of keys and says drive. You are ok to do so.

[Spank86]

There are no-win no-fee solicitors around Tim, most will at least give a free opinion/consultation even if they won't take the case (for instance if they don't think they'll win).

If as you say he's skint then it's worth trying for a little lost time. Cheaper than years and years of increased premiums.

[Mark-SV-UK]

surely if the insurance have admitted that its an admin error there end they would be the ones to blame and your son would be covered under there insurance protection, look into the insurance company and inform them you will make an official complaint to there insurance ombudsman about last of professionalism in covering a client. bet they will soon jump. I would also tell them they should put up the funds to pay for a solicitor as its there **** up not the company or your son but the insurance company themselves

[timwilky]

TBH, I think it is his boss that hasn't informed the insurance of a new driver. Although he says he did. Seems suspect that during the course of his interview in the back of a police car my son had gone from uninsured to insured.

I would be expecting his boss to stump up for legal representation to defend an prosecution. My son was driving in good faith that his employer had provided cover when he employed him as a delivery driver. As he employs a dozen other drivers, makes you wonder what their insurance status is like.

[Owenski]

Best your kid finds out like that rather than if he had had a knock.

Still sucks mind you and yes I think his employer should ensure no bashlash is felt by your lad.

[TamSV]

As RH says, there's a statutory defence written into the legislation precisely for circumstances like this. He definitely shouldn't take the points.

If he can get the employer to pony up for the defence costs, instead of the fine he's already agreed to, that would seem a fair solution.

[Sir Trev]

My 250 got totalled by a blind Escort driver in that situation way back in the day. He had no way of knowing that his boss had not paid any of the insurance installments so my claim failed. My useless insurance company spent so long finding that out the company then went bust before I could sue any of the directors...

It's a real problem but I hope your lad comes out of it OK Tim.

[timwilky]

Son has just been sent a conditional offer, £200 and 6 points.

NFC. His boss says he will go with him to court, good get him in the witness box. "Did you inform the accused he was covered on the business policy to drive your vehicle?" "Yes!". End of (I hope)

[Owenski]

Sounds steep until you realize that's the penalty for not paying an annual insurance premium, they seriously need to sort out the punishment to befit the crime.

I know your lad wasnt dodging the premium Tim so he's not covered by that little dig, but £200 is hardly a punishment for not having paid a premium 3 times that.

[yorkie_chris]

Hey mate, it might also be a sly tactic on the part of the coppers. A £1000 fine no fooker is going to pay unless they're bang guilty.
£200, someone might accept the points and save them the hassle of court?

I may have told you the tale before of the coppers trying to strong arm bullsh*t me into accepting the easy route for them even though I was completely innocent.

[Owenski]

ahhh like the parking fine fiasco? ie your fine is £70 but pay within 14days and it will be half so folk pay it early as opposed to appealing Dirty!

[Spank86]

Sounds steep until you realize that's the penalty for not paying an annual insurance premium, they seriously need to sort out the punishment to befit the crime.

I know your lad wasnt dodging the premium Tim so he's not covered by that little dig, but £200 is hardly a punishment for not having paid a premium 3 times that.
It would be better if the immediate punishment was greater but the insurance premium increase was less.

[Lozzo]

Back in 2000 I was working for a firm in Doncaster and had full use of the fairly new company Renault Master van, which I had probably done about 40,000 miles in. One evening I was returning up the A1M from Bognor Regis when I had a massive blow-out of the front offside tyre which slewed the van round into the armco. The van spun a couple of times and suffered quite serious damage which very nearly wrote it off.

Once we'd recovered the van back we started the insurance claim, only to find I wasn't covered because my idiot boss had forgotten that employees were named on the policy and it wasn't an 'any person employed by the company' type of policy. He had no option but to lie to the insurance company and claim that he was the one driving, which suited me because I could just wash my hands of the whole episode and not say a thing.

Two weeks later he gets a summons from Beds Police for driving without due care and not reporting the accident to the relevant authorities (damage caused to the armco). As he's already put his name to the insurance claim and said he was driving I was not about to take the rap because that would put me in the frame for driving uninsured and the pair of us for fraud, so I basically told him he'd have to take it on the chin and handle that himself as punishment for being stupid enough to leave me off the insurance. He managed to dodge the due care charge by explaining the tyre blowing out but they nicked him for the failure to report.

Did I feel bad? Not a bit, the bloke turned out to be a complete b'stard when the company folded and left me out of pocket by a couple of grand.

[Red Herring]

Tim, I know I pointed you in the direction of the statuary defence but he won't be able to avail himself of that if he was using it for "personal use" (your post 20) when he was stopped. The best he can hope for is to take his boss along and argue "Special reasons" as to why they shouldn't endorse his licence with penalty points.

[timwilky]

Well just to update this. The lad has pleaded not guilty and is up before the magistrate on Thursday. His employer at the time is not talking to him. Watch this space.

[daveyrach]

I guess they were trying to get people who are working and claiming housing benefit or something like that. But as I said in my rant. Driving a personal van is no indication of it being a work vehicle.


You can work and claim housing, I do I earn 25k a year and am still entitled to housing as I am married with 4 children. Ridiculous I know but its a hang over from when I was unemployed the payment just reduce as my salary increases. Still a hefty chunk, I pay my way so why not claim some back?

[21QUEST]

You are right...it is ridiculous. I think I'm going to get married.... :D

Good luck to your Lad TimW

[timwilky]

Not guilty

Apparently the magistrates have recommended to the police that my sons ex employer should be investigated.

Result. But to be honest, I would have thought when he submitted his written defense to the initial summons that the CPS would have read it and decided not to proceed.

5 months of hell for the poor sod. He now has a proper job where a clean licence is a necessity.

[yorkie_chris]

Good stuff glad it's sorted :)

[SvNewbie]

Great result. Very lucky for the judge to see sense.

[Spank86]

Great result. Very lucky for the judge to see sense.
Believe it or not magistrates are humans too.

He clearly had a reasonable expectation that he was insured, I mean I have absolutely no way of checking my company insures me aside from their assurances.

I am surprised the CPS didn't pick up on it but They probably get so many cases across their desk they only scan them before going to court.

[Biker Biggles]

Not guilty

Apparently the magistrates have recommended to the police that my sons ex employer should be investigated.

Result. But to be honest, I would have thought when he submitted his written defense to the initial summons that the CPS would have read it and decided not to proceed.

5 months of hell for the poor sod. He now has a proper job where a clean licence is a necessity.

Might be worth a complaint to the CPS with the MP copied in.On the one hand its a huge wast of public money,and when they carp on about "strict liability" its one for the MP to question.How can it be right to be "strictly"guilty even if you cant know you are doing anything wrong?

[Viney]

ahhh like the parking fine fiasco? ie your fine is £70 but pay within 14days and it will be half so folk pay it early as opposed to appealing Dirty!I appeal EVERY parking ticket even if i know i was in the wrong. You can still legally pay the reduced fee. DO NOT wait until the 28 days before you appeal. So far i have lost 3 parking tickets and won 7! Some of which here honest mistakes. Even got off parking on a double red route :) annnywayyyy

Go luck for your Son Tim. Hope he gets it sorted, by 6 points for no insurance is a nasty code and will hammer his insurance.

[timwilky]

Read the above post Ian. not guilty. the systems works

[jambo]

Glad to hear this result Tim, must have been pretty stressful for him having this hanging over his head. It's not generally reasonable to demand to see the paperwork for your company's insurance, certainly not something I'd have insisted on so glad he got someone sensible ruling over the case.

Jambo

[Bluepete]

The CPS will only have a case worker dealing with "Minor Road Traffic Offences" (as they're known) prior to the day in front of the beak. Their job is to make sure all the papers etc are in place.
On the day, the file will be handed to a minion CPS drone who's working their way up the ladder. They'll usually have had no knowledge of the job prior to that day.
In this case, it's clear the bench made the correct decision, but it's for them to decide if Tims lad had insurance or the reasonable expectation he was insured as per conversations with his boss. It's not something the CPS can decide on.

Well done to your lad Tim for sticking to his guns. I really approve when people stand up for what's right.

Pete ;)

[yorkie_chris]

Do they not decide on "reasonable chance of conviction"/"public interest" sort of thing or is this not applicable for motoring offences?

[Bluepete]

In this sort of case, where insurance is the issue, the defendant has to persuade the bench that they had a reasonable assumption they were insured. It's a defence that only the courts can hear, and sometimes, people tell lies "oh, my husband/wife sorts the insurance out when they know damn well they werent covered)
So no, the CPS cannot bin it prior to a hearing.

Pete

[Red Herring]

Nice result Tim, hopefully he'll put it down to experience and be the wiser for it next time.

[Fordward]

They probably get so many cases across their desk they only scan them before going to court.


Correct, CPS often haven't even looked at it before the morning of the court hearing.

Prosecutor shouldn't run the case unless he thinks there is at least a 50% chance of a conviction, but how can you make that assessment if your walking into a court room and haven't yet read about why you are there!

Well done to your son for taking it to court and good result!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk