| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| no insurance http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=30488 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | no insurance |
Would your your LA require the plate off a vehicle be handed in if it was uninsured even though parked off road? |
|
| Author: | Chris the Fish [ Tue Jan 03, 2017 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
Yes. Any LA should require it back. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Tue Jan 03, 2017 8:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
wannabeeahack wrote: Would your your LA require the plate off a vehicle be handed in if it was uninsured even though parked off road? Yes. |
|
| Author: | heathcote [ Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
wannabeeahack wrote: Would your your LA require the plate off a vehicle be handed in if it was uninsured even though parked off road? Yes. To be licensed the vehicle must be roadworthy,no insurance makes it obvious that the vehicle is not roadworthy. |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Wed Jan 04, 2017 5:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
Chris the Fish wrote: Yes. Any LA should require it back. Why ? |
|
| Author: | heathcote [ Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
MR T wrote: Chris the Fish wrote: Yes. Any LA should require it back. Why ? Because a license is issued to a vehicle with a reg. No. on application and is declared roadworthy at issue of which part and parcel is proof of adequate (correct) motor vehicle insurance,if licensed motor vehicle insurance is allowed to lapse the Council must automatically suspend the license and demand return of the plate,on correct insurance being proven once again to be in force the Council should lift the suspension and return the plate to the proprietor. Thought you would have been aware of this practice. |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
heathcote wrote: MR T wrote: Chris the Fish wrote: Yes. Any LA should require it back. Why ? Because a license is issued to a vehicle with a reg. No. on application and is declared roadworthy at issue of which part and parcel is proof of adequate (correct) motor vehicle insurance,if licensed motor vehicle insurance is allowed to lapse the Council must automatically suspend the license and demand return of the plate,on correct insurance being proven once again to be in force the Council should lift the suspension and return the plate to the proprietor. Thought you would have been aware of this practice. 20 years out of date.....just made up by your council......you can insure for a week...my insurante wont insure with out a named driver...just red tape... |
|
| Author: | Chris the Fish [ Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
MR T wrote: 20 years out of date.....just made up by your council......you can insure for a week...my insurante wont insure with out a named driver...just red tape... Unusual but I have to disagree with you this time Mr T. It is a red tape that has a good and valid reason. You can insure by the week, but if it lapses at the end of the week, the LA should immediately demand the plate back. If the LA wanted to be ar5ey about it they could decline to re-issue as the requirements of the Licence have not been met. I would hope however that they would apply a little common-sense and simply return the Licence when all is in order. |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 8:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
I don't know the legal position on this but if you apply a little reasoning to it you could come to the conclusion that if you had to prove that the car was insured correctly to get the plate issued then if the car is no longer insured then the plate is no longer issued correctly and as such the Council should have it back. If that isn't the case many drivers would simply cancel their hire and reward insurance as soon as they have their plate and just take out ordinary insurance. |
|
| Author: | heathcote [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
grandad wrote: I don't know the legal position on this but if you apply a little reasoning to it you could come to the conclusion that if you had to prove that the car was insured correctly to get the plate issued then if the car is no longer insured then the plate is no longer issued correctly and as such the Council should have it back. If that isn't the case many drivers would simply cancel their hire and reward insurance as soon as they have their plate and just take out ordinary insurance. Your assumptions are correct and a Council who do not act are failing in their duty as a Licensing Authority and Public Protection(which includes other road users) A Council who allows a vehicle to be licensed and used without the correct motor insurance in place would be liable in certain circumstances along with the proprietor and driver. |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
grandad wrote: I don't know the legal position on this but if you apply a little reasoning to it you could come to the conclusion that if you had to prove that the car was insured correctly to get the plate issued then if the car is no longer insured then the plate is no longer issued correctly and as such the Council should have it back. If that isn't the case many drivers would simply cancel their hire and reward insurance as soon as they have their plate and just take out ordinary insurance. Captain Cab used to refer to some areas as sleepy hollows which I always used to interpret as areas where time stood still, or licencing regimes were too lazy to keep up to date. The production of the correct insurance is perfectly reasonable when being issued a licence or renewing it, and is a must when the vehicle is on the road working or not working.(Repeat, on the road). As for it being parked up on private land or in a garage being repaired, which might take months, then this is a cost that is not necessary. In some places handing your licence back in and having it returned to you at a later date, is not an option. You hand the licence in - it is gone. With changes in the way traffic policing has advanced, the ability to see whether a vehicle is insured or not has far outstripped a letter in the post from your council. The council only has to abide by the law of the land that the vehicle must be insured when on the road. Condition of licences should be constantly reviewed to see whether they are practical and even legal, as of today's needs. That is part of the reason it is important the local hackney and ph have regular meetings with the licencing department to make sure that people who have no knowledge of the practical day to day workings of providing a hackney/ph service is up to date, and certain red tape is no longer needed. Left to their own devices, licencing departments can be a utter nightmare. |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
MR T wrote: grandad wrote: I don't know the legal position on this but if you apply a little reasoning to it you could come to the conclusion that if you had to prove that the car was insured correctly to get the plate issued then if the car is no longer insured then the plate is no longer issued correctly and as such the Council should have it back. If that isn't the case many drivers would simply cancel their hire and reward insurance as soon as they have their plate and just take out ordinary insurance. Captain Cab used to refer to some areas as sleepy hollows which I always used to interpret as areas where time stood still, or licencing regimes were too lazy to keep up to date. The production of the correct insurance is perfectly reasonable when being issued a licence or renewing it, and is a must when the vehicle is on the road working or not working.(Repeat, on the road). As for it being parked up on private land or in a garage being repaired, which might take months, then this is a cost that is not necessary. In some places handing your licence back in and having it returned to you at a later date, is not an option. You hand the licence in - it is gone. With changes in the way traffic policing has advanced, the ability to see whether a vehicle is insured or not has far outstripped a letter in the post from your council. The council only has to abide by the law of the land that the vehicle must be insured when on the road. Condition of licences should be constantly reviewed to see whether they are practical and even legal, as of today's needs. That is part of the reason it is important the local hackney and ph have regular meetings with the licencing department to make sure that people who have no knowledge of the practical day to day workings of providing a hackney/ph service is up to date, and certain red tape is no longer needed. Left to their own devices, licencing departments can be a utter nightmare. In the circumstances that you mention, ie a vehicle being laid up for months. If the owner has cancelled the insurance, doesn't that mean he would also have to declare a SORN? This would also mean that the vehicle would no longer be taxed. Do you think it is right that a council should allow an untaxed, uninsured vehicle to still hold a hackney/ph license? |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
grandad wrote: MR T wrote: grandad wrote: I don't know the legal position on this but if you apply a little reasoning to it you could come to the conclusion that if you had to prove that the car was insured correctly to get the plate issued then if the car is no longer insured then the plate is no longer issued correctly and as such the Council should have it back. If that isn't the case many drivers would simply cancel their hire and reward insurance as soon as they have their plate and just take out ordinary insurance. Captain Cab used to refer to some areas as sleepy hollows which I always used to interpret as areas where time stood still, or licencing regimes were too lazy to keep up to date. The production of the correct insurance is perfectly reasonable when being issued a licence or renewing it, and is a must when the vehicle is on the road working or not working.(Repeat, on the road). As for it being parked up on private land or in a garage being repaired, which might take months, then this is a cost that is not necessary. In some places handing your licence back in and having it returned to you at a later date, is not an option. You hand the licence in - it is gone. With changes in the way traffic policing has advanced, the ability to see whether a vehicle is insured or not has far outstripped a letter in the post from your council. The council only has to abide by the law of the land that the vehicle must be insured when on the road. Condition of licences should be constantly reviewed to see whether they are practical and even legal, as of today's needs. That is part of the reason it is important the local hackney and ph have regular meetings with the licencing department to make sure that people who have no knowledge of the practical day to day workings of providing a hackney/ph service is up to date, and certain red tape is no longer needed. Left to their own devices, licencing departments can be a utter nightmare. In the circumstances that you mention, ie a vehicle being laid up for months. If the owner has cancelled the insurance, doesn't that mean he would also have to declare a SORN? This would also mean that the vehicle would no longer be taxed. Do you think it is right that a council should allow an untaxed, uninsured vehicle to still hold a hackney/ph license? As long as it is not working the road......do you think he should lose his plate...or just pay money out for nothing.. |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
Whereas I/me/you might know how to check insurance cover a car at ASKMID i doubt our licensing would have a clue |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: no insurance |
MR T wrote: As long as it is not working the road......do you think he should lose his plate...or just pay money out for nothing.. Personally, I think that if the car is not correctly taxed or insured then the plate should be returned to the council |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|