Hi Guys,

Over the last month we've been tracking developments in this situation and felt it best to let you know what's being introduced.

Things are shortly going to become even more bureaucratic. The EU directive that resulted in our government making the Motor Insurers database a legal requirement started the ball rolling and Insurers have a legal requirement to place all details upon the database within 14 days of policy inception, which is changing to within 7 days shortly.

Whilst the primary purpose of the database is to combat uninsured drivers, a positive note of the database is that it also saves the queue in the post office by allowing the online purchase of road tax.

The next stage will result from a further directive that will become law shortly, this resulted from the Motor Insurers Bureau (the body that indemnifies victims of uninsured drivers) successfully lobbying the government to introduce a law that requires ALL vehicles (including those kept "off road") to have valid Insurance in place.

The latest position (ie. two weeks ago) was that the MIB were sucessful in lobbying the government to ensure that ALL vehicles (kept on or off the road) will require Insurance.

It seems that in a similar way to how the new road tax system operates, they will be using the data contained within the Motor Insurers Database to inform the authorites that an individual's motor Insurance has expired.

You'll need to search upon the MIB site for further details and the link for their site is as follows:

http://www.mib.org.uk


I'll post more details once further info becomes available in this regard, but felt it worth letting everyone know whats looming on the horizon.

Kind regards

Tony

 

Whats the point of insuring a car the doesnt/cant move?

 

bit harsh really .. so you have a car that you are gonna spend a year restoring .. and you still need to insure it ..
hate to say it but the insurance companies are going to suddenly make a bit of a profit ...

also can't get the links to work..

 

Links don't work.

 

Insurance companies love to take money so can't see them refusing this gem.

 

thats a bit hrassh really

as andy, and eagle say, why insure a car if it doesnt move due to having a resto,

thats the problem im going to have then, as not many people can insure 2 cars

 

does every car need this, Even SORN cars?

 

Tony - is there going to be a "common sense" solution (hard to believe I know where the government is concerned) whereby the insurance companies may offer an "off-road" policy for SORN vehicles for example to satisfy the "database"?
By nature of SORN, which is an official classification that the database will also be aware of, the vehicle is obliged to be offroad and unused, so it seems simple to implement..
Just my 2p thoughts..

 

You can insure as many cars as you want, prob is NCB has to start from scratch on the second policy. Ive got 8+years NCB on both of mine & this took a lot of years without an accident,

 

they will need a new box on the application form...
"who will be the main driver?"
.
.
.
no-one!

 

I doubt it'll ever be enforced completely, I have access to update our trade policy directly into the MID database. I only put on the stuff we're using at the time and that's is all that is currently required by law.

I certainly won't be sitting down to put every fucking car on the database that sits on the forecourt for months

And I VERY much doubt the older boys in the game will do it either, half of them can't even spell computer let alone use one.

I'm guessing at least 8?

 

like petrol the goverment have large helping og tax out of ur premium WANKERS!

 

yea i know that, but when one of your cars is a rs turbo and the other one is a cosy being restored all the ncb will have to go on the cosy as its more value than the rst, but try and insure a rst with no ncb, not going to happen,

there should be a compromise somewhere and not to pay like full whack on a car thats in a million bits and wont be back on the road until about a year later, why pay insurance for a car thats safely in a garage being restored but not being able to use, dont see the point when a sorn declaration is on the databas for police records and dvla that the car is a sorn, obviously if that cars being driven about on a sorn then they should be done for it unless going to tax it

but not why its in a garage

its stupid

 

I would never even consider having no insurance on a car even if it is in pieces being restored. Fires and theft and damage can still happen.

Insurance for a car in this position is very cheap, last time I covered a cosworth for restoration it was about Ł150 and that included 4 days in the year that it could be taken on the road.

 

thats all it's going to be for another tax on us law abiding peep's

 

good point, but I'm sure what Tony means is minimum 3rd party liability cover, if it's intended as a measure to combat uninsured drivers.. the authorities couldn't give a stuff if you have fire or theft cover for your own protection.

 

 

You don't need to insure a SORN car though do you?

 

paddy u twat

 

think thats the point yes you will have to

 

16 actually

 

not if its concurrent

 

If they think Im gonna pay for a 35 yr old mini that hasnt moved out of my garage for 15 yrs and my cbr1000f thats only used 6 months of the year they can fook off.I wont pay,pure and simple. w*nkers.

 

I've read elsewhere that you don't thou

 

Here's a link to an article @ MIB:

Off Road Compulsory Insurance

The new offence will be "Keeping a vehicle without insurance"

What about a car off road being modified, not yet complete, not previously insured in that state.
It will require an engineers report of roadworthyness to get insurance,

BUT IT'S NOT ROADWORTHY, IT'S NOT COMPLETE, you can't get a report, you can't insure it, you can't sell it because no-one will buy if it can't be insured.
All you can do is scrap it.



.

 

But to insure a vehicle you need to have TAX, and to have tax you have to have an MOT. If your floor pans are missing, then you aint gonna get an MOT and likewise for Tax.


All bollox in my opinion and they can go fuck themselves, just my view.

 

Since when?

 

ill be fooked if im insuring my nail in the garage its not seen a road for nearly 3 years

 

Other way round mate. You need insurance to tax a car.

 

well

i know greenlight the car has to be mot to be insured

so tony where does this stand with cars that are off the road?

 

typical, instead of finding the people without insurance and nicking them they take money out of everybodys pocket instead.

When you watch police stop camera or whatever they always seem to let the ilegal drivers off lightly

nice

Cheers
Daniel

 

Fooking joke its all about MONEY ,insurers make enough out of drivers as it is the only thing that gets cheaper each year is mobile phones!!!!!!!!!TALK IS CHEAP


knobheads the lot of them

 

As I understand this is to catch drivers with no insurance.

But I may wrong.

I'm under the impression that if you car is not SORN then it has to be insured. Since the police have access to the SORN, tax and insurance database they can search through all those who have no cars that aren't SORN but aren't insured and target them.

 

So basically, My car, in its current, undriveable, un-taxed and un-mot'd state needs insurence according to the new bill to be passed.

Yet I can't have valid insurence without tax and test

makes a fucking mockery of the system - they are scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one.

Plain and simple, it will not work - the number of cars being registered under false names and addresses will increase dramatically and the number of people evading speeding fines via camera systems will increase aswell.

The government and the MIB need to come to some sort of aggreement about the implications that this sort of "insurence policy" will have

 

I can't believe they can implement something like this which so obviously will not work

Do they not actually sit down and think about anything other than the money they could make?

 

but they are basicly saying every car has to be insured - so if you have a car in the garage unisured you are a criminal even if you don't use it is that policing?

the car is not a risk to other road users in the garage.

so instead of nicking people without insurance and making sure they comply with the law, they are making everybody insure everything even if you are honest law abiding person.

will have to wait and see what happens.

 

Have to say i agree with you here, fuck em

 

Ditch road Tax and put price of fuel up this makes the so called TRAVELLERS pay, and u as a person should b insured to drive your cars and only your cars(as you can only drive one at a time) and none of this named driver bollox which a 18 year can drive rich daddys fooking porker about like a TWAT and cause an accident.

THATS MY OPINION

money money money

WHAT ABOUT ALL THE ILLEGALS DRIVING FOOKING CABS WITHOUT A LICENCE AND INSURANCE

 

oh don't you just love this fookin cuntry.............

 

Another thought,

Driver gets banned, would normally keep car off the road (SORN) until the ban finishes.

Not any longer, the car would have to be sold, unless insurance companies are going to let banned drivers take out insurance.

This thread started as a result of the MIB sucessfully lobbying the Government.

The Government WILL HAVE to put in exemptions for certain categories.

If I remember, before SORN the PROPOSAL was that ALL vehicles had to be taxed whether in a museum or off road etc. or they would loose their reg number.

SORN came about to solve the above problems.

They will HAVE to use SORN as an exception for Insurance as well as Tax.

.