Taxi Driver Online

I'd guess the insurance thing is the biggie here rather than the speeding thing.

But not really sure I fully understand the insurance thing, and don't think it's adequately explained here...

And article comes to quite an abrupt end, but can't find any more...


Glasgow private hire driver gets warning after speeding and driving without insurance

https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glas ... s-28678157

The man was allowed to keep his private hire car driver's licence for a restricted period of one year despite an objection from Police Scotland.

A private hire driver has been issued a severe warning after he amassed 10 points on his licence for driving too fast and without insurance.

Glasgow’s licensing committee heard how James Young had been caught speeding and driving without insurance, after Police Scotland objected to his renewal application.

Councillors decided to grant a private hire car driver’s licence for a restricted period of one year, rather than three, and issued the warning over his future conduct.

An officer from Police Scotland said the force did not believe Mr Young was a “fit and proper person” to hold a licence due to his convictions.

She said he had received seven points and was fined £400 after he was convicted in October 2022 of driving without insurance.

Councillors also heard he has a speeding conviction from March 2021, when he received three points. These expire in April this year.

Councillor Alex Wilson, SNP, who chairs the licensing committee, said: “You’re saying your licence is precious to you. How come you have allowed yourself to get within losing your licence?

“If you get any more points you would lose your actual driver’s licence.”

Mr Young, who said he had been a private hire car driver for 15 years, said he had a black box fitted in his car, which “wasn’t sending data” to his insurance company.

He said he hadn’t been aware of the issue as the company had sent an email but he didn’t “deal with emails.” The driver added his sister had received the email.

Mr Young said: “Unbeknown to me, for five weeks I was driving about, the police stopped me and told me, I gave them the documents, I showed them the black box.”

He said, following the incident, he now receives his own emails, adding: “Unfortunately me not dealing with emails has come back to haunt me.”

Councillor Wilson said: “If you are lucky enough for us to decide to keep your licence, how are you going to manage?”

The driver, who said he would have appealed the conviction over driving without insurance but he “didn’t have the finances to do it”vowed he would follow the “rules and regulations of the road.”

I know that kids can get cheaper insurance if they fit a box that sends info to insurance companies, or it does if you drive fast etc.

Maybe the insurance was on his private car, not his licensed vehicle.

He got 7 points as driving with no insurance has a 6-8 point range for the lowest category.

_________________
IDFIMH

Anyone's guess, but if telematics 'wasn’t sending data to his insurance company' I'd think they'd contact him to check and fix it first. If he didn't respond, then they'd likely cancel the insurance cover.

With ANPR and AskMID, lapsed insurance is usually apparent within 24 hours.

Yes, chaps - presumably the insurer wasn't getting the telematics info, and tried to contact him, but got no response, therefore pulled the plug on his policy...

Could the black box be a requirement of some kind of sentence imposed by the courts, or even a badge condition imposed on an errant driver? Doubt it, because not mentioned in the piece, although you never know...

But have certainly read of badged drivers being required to install CCTV (a kind of licensing naughty step), so requiring a black box would certainly be along the same lines

If you read it, this sort of clarifies.....

Quote:
He said he hadn’t been aware of the issue as the company had sent an email but he didn’t “deal with emails.” The driver added his sister had received the email.

Mr Young said: “Unbeknown to me, for five weeks I was driving about, the police stopped me and told me, I gave them the documents, I showed them the black box.”

He said, following the incident, he now receives his own emails, adding: “Unfortunately me not dealing with emails has come back to haunt me.”
End Quote.

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related

Yes, Chris, it's all just about there, but it doesn't actually say precisely why and at what point he became uninsured. You have to read between the lines/join the dots a bit to find out why and when he became uninsured, precisely. I mean, it's just stuff about not getting emails, then this (and you also have to assume what he's saying is wholly accurate):


Which means what, precisely?

But presumably five weeks earlier his policy had become invalid because his telematics device had stopped working, his insurer had tried to contact him about it but had been unsuccessful, and at that point the policy was cancelled or become void/ineffective, or whatever, but obviously the driver was unaware (or, at least, that's what he claims).

I think that if the article had specifically said precisely why and at what point he became uninsured then it would be a whole lot clearer.

Instead, we're simply told he'd been caught driving without insurance, then a lot of roundabout stuff about 'black boxes', emails, driving around for five weeks and mysterious documents (presumably the paper certificate of insurance, policy/schedule or whatever)

No.

_________________
IDFIMH