Motorists will need to keep their insurance policies up to date if they don't want to fall foul of a new law that could land them with a £100 fine - and even the loss of their car.

Thousands of drivers risk having their cars clamped and seized in their driveways under tough round-the-clock insurance rules which will come into force this spring.

Ministers say the crackdown - which includes automated £100 fines through the post - is designed to tackle more than a million uninsured rogue drivers.

Read more: clicky

This is going to be a pain in the arse if you buy a new car and have the old one on the drive waiting to be sold with no insurance but taxed as it's easier to sell taxed...

i thought a vehicle had to be on the road to have to be insured goverment taking the piss again
so i can have a car with no tax or mot but it has to be insured what is that going to stop?

ah just read it on there site your ok if it is on a sorn but again how will this stop uninsured drivers?

If your car isn't insured, it has to be sorned. Simple! That's all they're saying, the law hasn't really changed, they're just attempting to get more money out of it now.

I visited Merseyside Police HQ last year (as a guest, not arrested I hasten to add) and saw the NMPR system, this system is incredibly accurate at doing immediate checks automatically on vehicles that pass the cameras, it gives a signal when it finds a car registration with no insurance, tax etc. This system is also fitted to the patrol cars, they will always find a way of making you pay tax. K

human error means mistakes are made due to insurance company's failing to pass on the info of insured cars fast enough. My sisterinlaw was stopped due to the sytem telling the squad car she was not insured when she had actual renewed her insurance 3 days prior to to renewal date and the date she was pulled was 5 days later.

AND its up to YOU toprove it!!!! Been there myself!!!

Who has to have the insurance, the owner, the driver or the registered keeper?

How do cars on garage forecourts go on ?, i know they have trade plates to drive them on the road, do they have actual car insurance and all that it means when sitting on a forecourt or in a showroom?

Bert, trade plates cover Tax, so they still need to be MOT'd.

Trade insurance generally covers all the cars a trader owns. Depending on the policy the number of cars can be limited, it can also be unlimited by number of cars, but limited by valve of the vehicle.

All the cars are also covered for theft, but this is usually a pre-designated location, usually the forecourt.

My trade policy covers an unlimited amount of sales cars upto the amount of £35,000 and 30 of my own cars.
My boss has trade plates but still gets the odd fine here and there for not sorning the forecourt vehicles.

The car has to be insured, so it could be either or all. However, the person driving the vehicle has to be insured to do so. The car must also, legally, be insured in the name of the primary user of the vehicle, though proving otherwise is technically difficult, but some insurance companies have been known to hire private detectives to prosecute and/or invalidate the insurance of "fronters" as they are known (where someones dad for instance, gets insured on a high-value and/or powerful car, at a fraction of the price of the son/daughter, and then either adds "any driver" or names the son/daughter as a named driver to the insurance policy (for little, or nothing extra - it cost me nothing extra to add the "any driver" option to my insurance), but never uses the vehicle as its the son/daughter who primarily uses it).

Basically, you can own a car, be the registered keeper, and never use it or get insured on it, but the person driving it, must be. And the database does not discriminate or link the registered keeper to the insured person (at present), however if you are pulled, the police do check the person driving, is insured to be driving the vehicle.

If you inform the DVLC you're still ok according to the bloke I heard spoutinng about it. We'll see.

If it has got a SORN it is ok

What makes me laugh is that these NMPR cameras wont pick up someone driving without a valid licence will they. I ask you what is more dangerous, someone driving without a valid insurance policy or someone who has never passed a test? And I know of someone on this very forum that drives around on a provisional licence!!!

I was pulled for insurance after it had lapsed in a house move and we forgot about it as it was paid yearly. Obviously the renewal notice went to the old house. I got 6 points and a fine, yet was driving safely at 20mph past a school at the time. Yet someone doing 40 past that same school (30 mph road) only gets 3 points. Something f*&^ed up there!!!

The whole system is back asswards. Its not about getting dangerous drivers off the streets, its about protecting the govts revenue streams.

NMPR camera? you mean ANPR as in automatic number plate recognition?
whilst they dont get a person driving without a valid licence..the human element behind them can and does....
the camera can be set to look for anything....markers or intel for a particular car....such as one known to be used by a disqualified driver...
they arent the catch all the government sells them as...but combined with the human element...and usedproperly they are extremely effective

and for the record...drivers without insurance cost on average each of us 30 extra in premiums a year!

i told my boss about this yesterday and he phoned the police and they said they had no knowledge of this new ruling they said that any car removed from driveway ect without owners concent is theft

I have to disagree with this completely as its simply propaganda from the insurance companies.

How could me not having insurance cost anyone else any money? It simply cant.

What DOES cost the money are the people that keep having accidents. Yes, some of them do not have insurance and THAT costs insurance companies money but I put it to you that those people would have that same accident whether they were insured or not.

So its not people driving without insurance that adds to your premium, its people having accidents, false claims, and ambulance chaser lawyers that have added £30 to everyones insurance premium. Not to forget these private companies strive for more and more profit each year.

Insurance companies all pay to MIB (Motor Insurance Bureau), this covers drivers in cases of non insured drivers (whom they then attempt to claim the money back from).
Imagine (for example) being knocked down by an uninsured driver who has no funds whatsoever and the most expensive thing they own is the rust bucket of a car they are driving. How do you covers bills whilst you are off work etc This is where the MIB comes in.

MIB

Uninsured driver has accident: Money comes from MIB who get their money from the insurance companies
Insured driver has accident: Money comes direct from insurance companies.

Either way the insurance company is paying it out, so uninsured drivers do not cost the insurance companies more. The insurance companies just like you to think that they do. They can then justify the drivers increased premiums every year.

So I say again what costs everyone more money is the people having accidents, the false claims and the ambulance chasers.

An uninsured driver drives for a year without having a single accident.
An insured driver drives for a year and has 3 accidents.
Who is going to cost the insurance company money (even if you include the MIB)

Not strictly true, if the uninsured driver is identified the insurance collects the money from him or you have to sue him yourself.

But it still doesnt cost the insurance company any more than if the same driver was insured does it? They are paying out either way, so that isnt the cause of the problem.

Yes it does, because they haven't been paid a premium by the uninsured driver - they may have to pay out but there is no money going into the pot from the uninsured.

If you keep having prangs you pay for it yourself because your premium goes up. Uninsured drivers have to be covered some way and that is the extra premiums for the rest of the come from, the 30 squid. Heikol, the money has to come from somewhere and it sure isn't the insurance companies, we cover it whether you like it or not. A pox on all uninsured drivers I say.

£30 doesnt bother me; its the insurance companies continuously doubling the insurance renewals like cheeky barstard, for no reason at all, that annoys me. I can deal with an extra £30 to cover uninsured drivers, going from £220 to £540 and then to £1050 in 3 consecutive years for no apparent reason, is nothing to do with uninsured drivers, and plain and simple greed by insurance companies. You do things by the book, and you get shafted, and then they wonder why people are prepared to risk driving without insurance.

For the amount ive been using the car in the past 3 months, id be better to suspend the insurance (and SORN it of course lol) if the best quote I could get was £100+ per month (when you consider tax is £230 a year) and just get taxi's whenever I needed to go anywhere. I know of at least one person in the past year who has done this, due to their insurance going up and them not using the car enough to justify the economics of it, and I got thinking along the same lines when my initial renewal came through lol (fortunately ive had a much cheaper quote from someone else).

do you know that the insurance company payout even if the driver who crashed the vehicle is drunk behind the wheel as friend of ours son crashed his into a wall and insurance paid out for the repairs to the wall and yep he did get banned but i don't think that the ban is long enough and nobody knows what the exact drink drive limit is in pint's or glasses. which means really the law should be changed to not allow any amount of alcohol allowed as that would stop all confusion.
the ban also should be longer and depending on amount they have should drunk should be bigger fine and even make them take a new driving test and should have to volunteer to look after head injury's caused on people because of drunk drivers put it this way it would make you think twice about driving after a drink as i have looked after teenagers that had a career ahead of them but couldn't even feed themselves or walk,talk etc. It scared the hell out of me when i first started in 1993 and it has stayed with me 18 years later and i don't do that work anymore.

I knew about the insurance being changed as it was being talked about last year and insurance goes up each year because of theft's of cars but mainly because of people claiming for whiplash when they have got nothing wrong with them what so ever as they would know if they had it as they would have so much pain and not be able to sleep or turn their head and definetaly wouldn't be able to drive a car for a while and back injury they would know about it as i have one from working and popped a disc in lower back that can't be fixed and it's taken over 5 months before i could walk without aid and drive a car.