Minor motoring conviction

richy

Hi there,

I recently got convicted in the District Court on 2 charges. They were both to do with not having a vehicle correctly lighted up in a public area. Basically my brake lights were on constantly and I got a charge and conviction for each brake light.

Recently renewed my insurance a couple days before I went to court (Aviva). Cant remember if it asked me about any pending convictions or anything like that when renewing.

I am wondering what should I do? Should I wait until next year when renewing to mention it? Any idea how much this will increase my insurance (loading %). These are my only two convictions, no penalty points etc.

Cheers

shietpilot

Were you caught multiple times with the brake lights constantly on? I few months ago I was driving home and one of my twin element tail lights welded both contacts together making the brake lights permanently on and the check engine light came on. I drove through a checkpoint on my way home and only realised the brake lights were constantly on when I got home.

It would be pretty sickening if I got convicted for something like this. I got the tail light replaced the same day and all was fine.

richy

richy wrote: »

Hi there,

I recently got convicted in the District Court on 2 charges. They were both to do with not having a vehicle correctly lighted up in a public area. Basically my brake lights were on constantly and I got a charge and conviction for each brake light.

Recently renewed my insurance a couple days before I went to court (Aviva). Cant remember if it asked me about any pending convictions or anything like that when renewing.

I am wondering what should I do? Should I wait until next year when renewing to mention it? Any idea how much this will increase my insurance (loading %). These are my only two convictions, no penalty points etc.

Cheers

What? am I reading that right? You got a conviction per light cluster, in a single instance?

Or did you mean you were done, at two different times, for the same issue?


If the first, then surely you can appeal that? That's nonsense!? If a woman wandered around topless in the city and was arrested for indecent exposure, would she be done twice, for each tit she had out?


More to the point, I think you'd need to say it to them now? I think those kinda things are dated, so if you told them next year, they'd know by looking into it what date you were charged with them? Unless you planned to move insurance companies, then maybe you could get away with it?


It's mental that that can even happen. Surely that's an electronic issue that could happen to anyone?!

richy

No, first time. Basically, I was charged with cannabis possession too and I think this is why the guard tacked on the two charges for the brake lights. The judge didnt convict on the cannabis but did on the two brake lights.

So currently I have 2 convictions for failure to light up the vehicle in a public place

richy

Deleted User wrote: »

What? am I reading that right? You got a conviction per light cluster, in a single instance?

Or did you mean you were done, at two different times, for the same issue?


If the first, then surely you can appeal that? That's nonsense!? If a woman wandered around topless in the city and was arrested for indecent exposure, would she be done twice, for each tit she had out?


More to the point, I think you'd need to say it to them now? I think those kinda things are dated, so if you told them next year, they'd know by looking into it what date you were charged with them? Unless you planned to move insurance companies, then maybe you could get away with it?


It's mental that that can even happen. Surely that's an electronic issue that could happen to anyone?!

Charge for each brake light in a single instance. See my other comment I left after yours. Got no conviction for having cannabis on me (small amount) so dont want to appeal the two brake light convictions as it could rock the boat for example.

blindside88

My best advice from experience with Aviva is to cancel your insurance (without telling them about the conviction) and take a new policy with a different provider and disclose the conviction.

The reason I say this is I had a customer (last year when I worked in general insurance) that took a policy online with Aviva, didn't realise he he hadn't noted a small claim his partner had 2 years ago. When he noticed this 6 months later he called them to advise of the claim he had forgotten about and they cancelled him due to non disclosure. I had a terrible job trying to get him a new policy because he had been cancelled due to non disclosure

richy

blindside88 wrote: »

My best advice from experience with Aviva is to cancel your insurance (without telling them about the conviction) and take a new policy with a different provider and disclose the conviction.

The reason I say this is I had a customer (last year when I worked in general insurance) that took a policy online with Aviva, didn't realise he he hadn't noted a small claim his partner had 2 years ago. When he noticed this 6 months later he called them to advise of the claim he had forgotten about and they cancelled him due to non disclosure. I had a terrible job trying to get him a new policy because he had been cancelled due to non disclosure

Cheers for reply Blindside. Would it be better to wait until the Aviva insurance is up and just go with a new company and disclose it then? Any idea how much the loading is Dont companies ask you if you have ever cancelled a policy etc.

blindside88

richy wrote: »

Cheers for reply Blindside. Would it be better to wait until the Aviva insurance is up and just go with a new company and disclose it then? Any idea how much the loading is?

It's up to you but if you had a claim Aviva would probably void your policy for non disclosure (almost all companies ask about pending convictions in their "assumptions" which a lot of people skip over), I've no idea what kind of loading you'd be looking at as its a very niche market for insuring people with convictions. I'd advise getting in touch with a local broker and tell them the details. Kennco are probably your best bet for insurance in your circumstance as they take on higher risks

Pkiernan

How soon after getting stoned do you drive?

richy

Pkiernan wrote: »

How soon after getting stoned do you drive?

I had just finished work my friend. How soon after getting drunk do you drive? Because if you have ever carried a 6 pack in your car that you had just bought in the off-licence, that gives me the right to presume that you drive drunk, no?

smash

I'd be appealing that if I was you.

Jesus.

richy wrote: »

Would it be better to wait until the Aviva insurance is up and just go with a new company and disclose it then?

In one word, Yes

Esel

Jesus. wrote: »

In one word, Yes

Do you know what you are talking about??? :mad:

Read the post above from someone who apparently does.

OP: consider taking the advice above from blindside88.

biko

Pkiernan wrote: »

How soon after getting stoned do you drive?

Everyone, let's stick to the actual issue at hand.

grogi

richy wrote: »

Cheers for reply Blindside. Would it be better to wait until the Aviva insurance is up and just go with a new company and disclose it then? Any idea how much the loading is Dont companies ask you if you have ever cancelled a policy etc.

IMHO no, cancel straight away.

Aviva are one of the most ridiculous providers - they won't quote you if you don't fit their picture of perfect client - high value, low risk, no claims...

richy

blindside88 wrote: »

My best advice from experience with Aviva is to cancel your insurance (without telling them about the conviction) and take a new policy with a different provider and disclose the conviction.

The reason I say this is I had a customer (last year when I worked in general insurance) that took a policy online with Aviva, didn't realise he he hadn't noted a small claim his partner had 2 years ago. When he noticed this 6 months later he called them to advise of the claim he had forgotten about and they cancelled him due to non disclosure. I had a terrible job trying to get him a new policy because he had been cancelled due to non disclosure

grogi wrote: »

IMHO no, cancel straight away.

Aviva are one of the most ridiculous providers - they won't quote you if you don't fit their picture of perfect client - high value, low risk, no claims...

Cheers for the replies guys. My worry is with cancelling is that I think insurance companies ask you have you ever cancelled an insurance policy. Not 100% on this. Any input on this question. What do I say? Do I have to say yes even? How would they know.

blindside88

richy wrote: »

Cheers for the replies guys. My worry is with cancelling is that I think insurance companies ask you have you ever cancelled an insurance policy. Not 100% on this. Any input on this question. What do I say? Do I have to say yes even? How would they know.

They question they ask is "have you ever had an insurance policy cancelled" as in cancelled by the insurer. In this case you can say no, you can tell them you cancelled your insurance as you were planning on selling the car and have decided against it (if you want a reason as to why you cancelled mid year). It can take some time to get an insurance policy for something out of the ordinary so as I said earlier use a good broker. There are a lot of companies that won't insure with a conviction so the ones that will can really ramp up the price. Kennco are probably the best for it (although there may be another player since I left the market), they used to sell through brokers and through 123.ie as far as I remember. Good luck with the search, let us know how you get on

richy

blindside88 wrote: »

They question they ask is "have you ever had an insurance policy cancelled" as in cancelled by the insurer. In this case you can say no, you can tell them you cancelled your insurance as you were planning on selling the car and have decided against it (if you want a reason as to why you cancelled mid year). It can take some time to get an insurance policy for something out of the ordinary so as I said earlier use a good broker. There are a lot of companies that won't insure with a conviction so the ones that will can really ramp up the price. Kennco are probably the best for it (although there may be another player since I left the market), they used to sell through brokers and through 123.ie as far as I remember. Good luck with the search, let us know how you get on

Cheers Blindside will do.

richy

richy wrote: »

Cheers for the replies guys. My worry is with cancelling is that I think insurance companies ask you have you ever cancelled an insurance policy. Not 100% on this. Any input on this question. What do I say? Do I have to say yes even? How would they know.

I'm in that position. They don't care.

I sold a car 11 months into a policy, and cancelled the policy. I didn't realise it at the time, but I was blowing the bollocks off myself for every policy thereafter, as I hadn't gotten the extra year's NCB.

So I have one more year's driving experience than I do NCB history. But they never really ask when I'm getting insurance. I think they just assume the difference in the two means you were a named driver on someone else's policy before you went out on your own.


I'll tell you what I wouldn't do OP, I wouldn't leave your current policy running, and keep the head down. I wouldn't throw a few euro aside each week anticipating a hike in the insurance next year. I wouldn't change comany next year and then disclose it, and act like nothing out of the ordinary. I wouldn't do any of those things. No sir. Not me. Not a hope. No way. Never. Nada. No chance. Not in the past, not in the current, not in future...

Jesus.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll tell you what I wouldn't do OP, I wouldn't leave your current policy running, and keep the head down. I wouldn't throw a few euro aside each week anticipating a hike in the insurance next year. I wouldn't change comany next year and then disclose it, and act like nothing out of the ordinary. I wouldn't do any of those things. No sir. Not me. Not a hope. No way. Never. Nada. No chance. Not in the past, not in the current, not in future...

.

Esel wrote: »

Do you know what you are talking about??? :mad:

Esel

Esel wrote: »

Do you know what you are talking about??? :mad:

Probably.

coylemj

richy wrote: »

Charge for each brake light in a single instance. See my other comment I left after yours. Got no conviction for having cannabis on me (small amount) so dont want to appeal the two brake light convictions as it could rock the boat for example.

If you appeal the conviction for the lights, the Gardai cannot reinstate the cannabis charge, nor can they mention it at the appeal so it will be dealt with purely as an appeal for a motoring conviction and the (Circuit Court) judge will have no sight of the fact that you had drugs on your when the cops pulled you over.

Bear it in mind but also bear in mind that you'd normally show up with a barrister for a Circuit Court appeal and that will cost you. A conviction for lights shouldn't be such a big deal for insurance, I respect the advice you're getting from blindside88 which on the face of it looks like good advice but is a conviction for a couple of lights really such a big deal as far as insurance companies are concerned?

richy

coylemj wrote: »

If you appeal the conviction for the lights, the Gardai cannot reinstate the cannabis charge, nor can they mention it at the appeal so it will be dealt with purely as an appeal for a motoring conviction and the (Circuit Court) judge will have no sight of the fact that you had drugs on your when the cops pulled you over.

Bear it in mind but also bear in mind that you'd normally show up with a barrister for a Circuit Court appeal and that will cost you. A conviction for lights shouldn't be such a big deal for insurance, I respect the advice you're getting from blindside88 which on the face of it looks like good advice but is a conviction for a couple of lights really such a big deal as far as insurance companies are concerned?

Hi Coyle, Are you sure that the cant mention the other charge? Are you a solicitor? I thought the whole case had to be re-tried? Any idea how much a barrister would cost and the likelihood of the court throwing out the conviction?

The problem with the insurance is that only specialist brokers will quote you. Even if its only a conviction over lights, you are still dealing with a smaller pool of companies who are more expensive plus loading from convictions. Could be cheaper in the long run to appeal it if I could get the convictions overturned.

Thing is as I am guilty I am not sure if the circuit court would quash the convictions just because the outcome for me is a pain in the arse. I got fined 150 euro for each light so 300 total which is fine by me but the convictions are a kick in the teeth. Thanks again for the replies.

If I appeal in the circuit court wouldn't the guard have to turn up to give evidence? He was not present for any court dates in the District Court however.

coylemj

richy wrote: »

Hi Coyle, Are you sure that the cant mention the other charge? Are you a solicitor? I thought the whole case had to be re-tried? Any idea how much a barrister would cost and the likelihood of the court throwing out the conviction?

No, I am not a solicitor but I know for a fact that if you were not convicted of a drugs offence in the district court then there can be no mention of any drugs if you appeal the conviction for lights on the circuit court. The CC appeal would indeed be a rehearing of the DC case but only concerning evidence relating to the convictions in the DC i.e. matters to do with your lights. Whatever was said about drugs in the DC would be off limits in the CC.

richy wrote: »

If I appeal in the circuit court wouldn't the guard have to turn up to give evidence? He was not present for any court dates in the District Court however.

How were you convicted if the Garda didn't show up, did you plead guilty? Did you have a solicitor?

Esel

coylemj wrote: »

How were you convicted if the Garda didn't show up, did you plead guilty? Did you have a solicitor?

This.

Also, did you really get convicted on two charges of your brake light(s) being permanently on?

richy

coylemj wrote: »

No, I am not a solicitor but I know for a fact that if you were not convicted of a drugs offence in the district court then there can be no mention of any drugs if you appeal the conviction for lights on the circuit court. The CC appeal would indeed be a rehearing of the DC case but only concerning evidence relating to the convictions in the DC i.e. matters to do with your lights. Whatever was said about drugs in the DC would be off limits in the CC.



How were you convicted if the Garda didn't show up, did you plead guilty? Did you have a solicitor?

I got a solicitor and I pleaded guilty. The judge gave benefit of probation act in court which means that I have no conviction recorded for the drugs offence but I did plead guilty.

He did convict me of the two charges for the brake lights.

The was a garda inspector there who read out the charges and what happened. Only one or 2 of the other cases had a Garda turn up. Most of the cases (including drug possession) were done without any arresting garda presence.

Esel wrote: »

This.

Also, did you really get convicted on two charges of your brake light(s) being permanently on?

Ya one for left and one for right.

AFAIK, it costs like 200 plus to just sit down with a barrister and talk to them and find out if you are likely to win the case, nevermind the actual cost of getting them to attend etc.

Esel

@KKV - read this.

Jesus. wrote: »

... --- ...

@Jesus. - I fleshed out you 'post' from a single dot to the above. That's SOS, a call for help. Sit tight, help is on its way. Sometime soon; there are other more urgent cases...

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'll tell you what I wouldn't do OP, I wouldn't leave your current policy running, and keep the head down. I wouldn't throw a few euro aside each week anticipating a hike in the insurance next year. I wouldn't change comany next year and then disclose it, and act like nothing out of the ordinary. I wouldn't do any of those things. No sir. Not me. Not a hope. No way. Never. Nada. No chance. Not in the past, not in the current, not in future...

@KKV - Don't believe anything in this thread from Jesus.. Look back at his forked tongue reply to you, where he suckered you into replying to something I said when replying to him (a part of my reply) - this:

Esel wrote: »

Do you know what you are talking about??? :mad:.

Jesus. has a major chip on his shoulder from carrying his own insurance cross. Look at his recent posts (if they are not deleted already...).

@Jesus.: Must try harder.

Pro Hoc Vice

richy wrote: »

I got a solicitor and I pleaded guilty. The judge gave benefit of probation act in court which means that I have no conviction recorded for the drugs offence but I did plead guilty.

He did convict me of the two charges for the brake lights.

The was a garda inspector there who read out the charges and what happened. Only one or 2 of the other cases had a Garda turn up. Most of the cases (including drug possession) were done without any arresting garda presence.



Ya one for left and one for right.

AFAIK, it costs like 200 plus to just sit down with a barrister and talk to them and find out if you are likely to win the case, nevermind the actual cost of getting them to attend etc.

Lol €200 for a consultation with a barrister for minor District Court matters plus they get paid extra for the brief. What county you in OP I want to move.

Pro Hoc Vice

richy wrote: »

I had just finished work my friend. How soon after getting drunk do you drive? Because if you have ever carried a 6 pack in your car that you had just bought in the off-licence, that gives me the right to presume that you drive drunk, no?

The difference is 6 cans gone out of your system in 12 hours weed will show up in a blood or urine test for a number of days. You lucky AGS did not form opinion re intoxicated driving and do a blood/urine test.

Esel

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

The difference is 6 cans gone out of your system in 12 hours weed will show up in a blood or urine test for a number of days. You lucky AGS did not form opinion re intoxicated driving and do a blood/urine test.

You need to read the relevant posts again. It would appear to be solely about possession. So, cannabis unsmoked versus beer unopened.

richy

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Lol €200 for a consultation with a barrister for minor District Court matters plus they get paid extra for the brief. What county you in OP I want to move.

This is just what I read online. And that was referring to a barrister as coyle said I would need one for an appeal to the circuit court. Have you any idea how much a consultation would cost?

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

The difference is 6 cans gone out of your system in 12 hours weed will show up in a blood or urine test for a number of days. You lucky AGS did not form opinion re intoxicated driving and do a blood/urine test.

True. The guy did say that I could be done if I smoked the night before (18ish hours at this stage) for intoxication.

Pro Hoc Vice

Esel wrote: »

You need to read the relevant posts again. It would appear to be solely about possession. So, cannabis unsmoked versus beer unopened.

And you need to read my post I said a person caught in possession of cannabis while driving is lucky not to be arrested and brought to Garda station and have blood and urine tested. As most people I know who have cannabis usually smoke it.

Pro Hoc Vice

richy wrote: »

This is just what I read online. And that was referring to a barrister as coyle said I would need one for an appeal to the circuit court. Have you any idea how much a consultation would cost?



True. The guy did say that I could be done if I smoked the night before (18ish hours at this stage) for intoxication.

There is no limit for cannabis once in system it's in system and the result will be positive. If Garda said that to you he was being nice.

You do not need a barrister in an appeal but for some matters it would be advised. Road Traffic (except drink driving) a barrister is usually not needed. I believe a solicitor was used in district court he will be best person to advise you.

Esel

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

And you need to read my post I said a person caught in possession of cannabis while driving is lucky not to be arrested and brought to Garda station and have blood and urine tested. As most people I know who have cannabis usually smoke it.

No, the OP referred to cans in the car (paraphrasing here). You said "6 cans gone out of your system". That was my point.

Pkiernan

OP - related to your cannabis possession, how do you feel about financially support the monstrous criminal gangs each time you buy from them?
Next time you're chilling out spare a thought for the trafficked sex workers raped daily here, who are brought in by the same people you ultimately get your weed from.

Jesus.

Pkiernan wrote: »

OP - related to your cannabis possession, how do you feel about financially support the monstrous criminal gangs each time you buy from them? Next time you're chilling out spare a thought for the trafficked sex workers raped daily here, who are brought in by the same people you ultimately get your weed from.

Oh my good God :eek:

shietpilot

Pkiernan wrote: »

OP - related to your cannabis possession, how do you feel about financially support the monstrous criminal gangs each time you buy from them?
Next time you're chilling out spare a thought for the trafficked sex workers raped daily here, who are brought in by the same people you ultimately get your weed from.

How is this relevant here? OP doesn't have a conviction for cannabis. OP has a conviction for non-functioning brake lights. I wish the OP wouldn't have mentioned it but that's how it always goes on Boards.ie.

You might as well start fights here about non-Fairtrade coffee and the little pay workers get for it!

tossy

Pkiernan wrote: »

OP - related to your cannabis possession, how do you feel about financially support the monstrous criminal gangs each time you buy from them?
Next time you're chilling out spare a thought for the trafficked sex workers raped daily here, who are brought in by the same people you ultimately get your weed from.

I took a few months of from this place, posts like this make me wonder why i decided to check this forum this morning.

The 'holier than thou' road is a dangerous one to go down and it usually filled with pitfalls and contradictions unless you are a monk who lives in the Tibetan hills who definitelydoesn't go pig shooting in the USA enjoying the loose gun control laws over there and then chills with a cold one looking at the latest school shooting on the news.... just saying is all.

Corvo

Jesus. wrote: »

In one word, Yes

Please do not listen to this.

If you do have a claim, they could walk away from it for non-disclosure.

Pro Hoc Vice

Esel wrote: »

No, the OP referred to cans in the car (paraphrasing here). You said "6 cans gone out of your system". That was my point.

It was a post about being arrested for drink driving just because you had cans in car. The point I was making is that a person who drinks the drink goes out if system very quickly while a smoker can still have it showing up in a test for days and depending on how heavy a smoker even weeks. So driving while in possession of weed even though you may not have smoked in days leaves a person open to a test and possible conviction.

dr.fuzzenstein

Pkiernan wrote: »

OP - related to your cannabis possession, how do you feel about financially support the monstrous criminal gangs each time you buy from them?
Next time you're chilling out spare a thought for the trafficked sex workers raped daily here, who are brought in by the same people you ultimately get your weed from.

And that's why it should be legalised. Less support for gangs, less trafficking, less waste of customs, police, court and prison resources, plus a happier population. And tax take instead of wasting billions on the aforementioned resources. Everybody wins!
That or grow your own. How's the view now from your high horse?

richy

So my friend who works for a brokerage firm tried to get some quotes for me of companies that insure convicted drivers and he can't even get me one. Can only get ones for one conviction not two. I know they have to give quote if refused 3 times but it will be astronomical

blindside88

richy wrote: »

So my friend who works for a brokerage firm tried to get some quotes for me of companies that insure convicted drivers and he can't even get me one. Can only get ones for one conviction not two. I know they have to give quote if refused 3 times but it will be astronomical

Maybe speak to your solicitor about going down the appeal route as 2 separate convictions for the same offence seems crazy. Was it definitely 2 separate charges?

richy

blindside88 wrote: »

Maybe speak to your solicitor about going down the appeal route as 2 separate convictions for the same offence seems crazy. Was it definitely 2 separate charges?

Ya definitely. I rang him yesterday and from what I can gather the only way he said we could appeal is if we got our mechanic to come in and say he inspected it on the day and that it was working and that the guard was wrong.

It seems harshness doesnt really count as a reason to get an appeal. I dunno what to do.

blindside88

richy wrote: »

Ya definitely. I rang him yesterday and from what I can gather the only way he said we could appeal is if we got our mechanic to come in and say he inspected it on the day and that it was working and that the guard was wrong.

It seems harshness doesnt really count as a reason to get an appeal. I dunno what to do.

That's a real pain, did he happen to say why it is treated as 2 offences rather than 1? For example if my tyres weren't in a roadworthy condition it wouldn't be 4 deprecate offences, it seems crazy

richy

blindside88 wrote: »

That's a real pain, did he happen to say why it is treated as 2 offences rather than 1? For example if my tyres weren't in a roadworthy condition it wouldn't be 4 deprecate offences, it seems crazy

The guard didnt say anything. Didnt even mention that I would be charged with the brake lights issue. Judge didnt mention anything either

Special Circumstances

richy wrote: »

Ya definitely. I rang him yesterday and from what I can gather the only way he said we could appeal is if we got our mechanic to come in and say he inspected it on the day and that it was working and that the guard was wrong.

It seems harshness doesnt really count as a reason to get an appeal. I dunno what to do.

Tbh it doesn't seem like solicitor made a good job of this at all for you.

Pro Hoc Vice

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Tbh it doesn't seem like solicitor made a good job of this at all for you.

You mean getting the probation act on a drugs offence.

Special Circumstances

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

You mean getting the probation act on a drugs offence.

It's not like he didn't pay his TV licence. Has the poor box been done away with or what. Or at least the old bit of rough patch turning over a new leaf craic they trot out?

coylemj

Special Circumstances wrote: »

It's not like he didn't pay his TV licence. Has the poor box been done away with or what. Or at least the old bit of rough patch turning over a new leaf craic they trot out?

He couldn't reasonably have expected to walk away with a clean sheet, the judge was pretty charitable in letting him off the drugs charge and slapping him on the wrist for the lights. Getting a drugs conviction on your record has serious implications for a lot of people, not least if you want to travel to the US.

What I still don't understand is why those (relatively minor) convictions have such negative implications for car insurance - surely having a couple of faulty bulbs isn't a big deal as far as the insurance companies are concerned?

To put it in perspective, many insurance companies tell you (in the policy document) that you only need to notify them if you have 4 or more points which means you can get a speeding ticket and it has no implications for your insurance so why is the OP deep in the brown stuff over a couple of bulbs?

Special Circumstances

I stand corrected.
The whole "two separate offences out of brake fault in one stop, seems legit" and the "maybe we could get a mechanic to lie now after the fact" just oozes professionalism and competence.