Summonsed for driving without insurance

[KristeenL27]

I hope someone can help me. I am posting on behalf of my son, who has been summonsed for dirving without insurance and failure to produce an insurance certificate.

A few months ago, he was driving his employer's van, and was stopped by the police for no insurance and asked to produce documents within seven days. He discovered upon informing his employer, that his employer's insurance had been cancelled by the insurer's as he (the employer) had moved home and not informed the insurers. His employer went to the police station with my son and the insurance certificate which had been issued by the insurer's after the employer had called them to rectify the matter, but a summons has now arrived, asthe certificate did not cover the day in question.

My son was driving a vehicle not owned by him and was completely unaware of the fact that there was no insurance (he had seen the insurance certificate when he started driving the van and had no reason to think it was not still in existence). In fact, the employer was unaware it had been cancelled and so there was no way my son could have known.

My question is: does this fall under the category of something which could be called a good reason for my son to not be responsible, and also what does he do about the summons - does he plead guilty (because technically he was) and give mitigating circumstances or does he plead not guilty?

I have tried to ask the CAB without success, and cannot find anywhere else to get help wthout paying a solicitor.

Very grateful for any help or advice.

[wales01man]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

Plead Guilty and plead mitigating circumstance think he and the employer are lucky there was no accident resulting in someone being injured or worse.

its the responsibility of a driver to check and know a vehicle is insured taxed and fully road legal at all times sorry to be blunt but things could have been worse

[mystery1]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...irdparty-risks

Compulsory insurance or security against third-party risks


143 Users of motor vehicles to be insured or secured against third-party risks.


(1)Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act—


(a)a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road [F1or other public place] unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act, and


(b)a person must not cause or permit any other person to use a motor vehicle on a road [F2or other public place] unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that other person such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act.


(2)If a person acts in contravention of subsection (1) above he is guilty of an offence.


(3)A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of this section shall not be convicted if he proves—


(a)that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,


(b)that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and


(c)that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.


(4)This Part of this Act does not apply to invalid carriages.



M1

- - - Updated - - -

Plead Guilty and plead mitigating circumstance think he and the employer are lucky there was no accident resulting in someone being injured or worse.

its the responsibility of a driver to check and know a vehicle is insured taxed and fully road legal at all times sorry to be blunt but things could have been worse

Pleading guilty removes the statutory defence i alluded to above.

M1

[KristeenL27]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

Thanks for your advice. I appreciate what you are saying, but should someone expect to have to check their employer's insurance certificate every day they drive the vehicle? Would that be practical?

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you. So do I understand correctly that your advice is not to be plead gullty, because his offence falls under this category i.e. he was driving a vehicle not owned by him, in the course of his employment, and did not know it was not insured. His employer is prepared to confirm this is true, and did so at the police station, but they have gone ahead with the prosecution?

[Kati]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

This bit [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]?

(3)A person charged with using a motor vehicle in contravention of this section shall not be convicted if he proves—


(a)that the vehicle did not belong to him and was not in his possession under a contract of hiring or of loan,


(b)that he was using the vehicle in the course of his employment, and


(c)that he neither knew nor had reason to believe that there was not in force in relation to the vehicle such a policy of insurance or security as is mentioned in subsection (1) above.

[mystery1]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

This bit @mystery1?

Indeed.

M1

[wales01man]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

Wait and see what the Courts have to say I can see no excuse they both need to be taken to court who knows what will happen

[KristeenL27]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

Thank you both for replying, but I am not sure what the advice is? Wales01man says plead guilty, he deserves everything he gets, and I am not sure what mystery1 is advising?

[wales01man]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

M1 is advising there may be a way out I say plead guilty as being found guilty sometimes carry a greater fine/points .

If you can afford it or the employer is decent a Solicitor woudl be best for advice

[mystery1]

Re: Summonsed for driving without insurance

Thank you both for replying, but I am not sure what the advice is? Wales01man says plead guilty, he deserves everything he gets, and I am not sure what mystery1 is advising?

The law says,

To drive on the roads you need insurance.

If you drive without insurance an offence is committed.

It then says you should not be convicted if it's not your car or a car you hired AND you were using it for work AND you had no reason to believe it wasn't insured (your employer told you it was or led you to believe it was).



Essentially because it was a works vehicle and you'd expect your employer to be insured then no conviction should happen.

M1