Driving with no insurance

Veloce

Hi there.

RE driving with no insurance or invalid insurance.

Can someone tell me if there are two separate offences in Ireland for having no insurance? a) 'Driving without insurance' and b) 'driving with invalid insurance'?

I know in the UK they are two separate offences but I assume they carry similar penalties.

Thanks.

4ensic15

Veloce wrote: »

Hi there.

RE driving with no insurance or invalid insurance.

Can someone tell me if there are two separate offences in Ireland for having no insurance? a) 'Driving without insurance' and b) 'driving with invalid insurance'?

I know in the UK they are two separate offences but I assume they carry similar penalties.

Thanks.

There is an offence of obtaining insurance by deception and also and offence of driving without insurance. Anyway this is not the UK and there are different laws here.

Veloce

4ensic15 wrote: »

There is an offence of obtaining insurance by deception and also and offence of driving without insurance. Anyway this is not the UK and there are different laws here.

Understood Ireland is not part of the UK.... I just wanted to understand if there was a similar offence here as I have read on UK forums that you can be prosecuted for undeclared modifications - ie driving without valid insurance.

If there specific offence for invalid insurance in Ireland does it fall under 'driving with no insurance'?

coylemj

Veloce wrote: »

If there specific offence for invalid insurance in Ireland does it fall under 'driving with no insurance'?

You would be done simply for driving with no insurance.

But if you're going to get into the details of unapproved modifications, it would still be simply driving with no insurance and would require that the Gardai call in as a witness a representative of the driver's insurance company to state that the modification had rendered the policy void so on the day he had no effective cover.

Making a false statement to obtain insurance is a separate offence, you could be prosecuted for that as well as for driving with no insurance though if that related to obtaining insurance for a car that had been modified, the prosecution would have to prove that the car was already modified when the policy was taken out which would be virtually impossible. The classic defence would be that the car was a regular model when the policy was taken out and the owner would plead ignorance as to the fact that the modification needed to be notified. So you don't tend to see many prosecutions for making a false statement to obtain insurance in relation to mechanical modifications.

4ensic15

coylemj wrote: »

You would be done simply for driving with no insurance.

But if you're going to get into the details of unapproved modifications, it would still be simply driving with no insurance and would require that the Gardai call in as a witness a representative of the driver's insurance company to state that the modification had rendered the policy void so on the day he had no effective cover.

Making a false statement to obtain insurance is a separate offence, you could be prosecuted for that as well as for driving with no insurance though if that related to obtaining insurance for a car that had been modified, the prosecution would have to prove that the car was already modified when the policy was taken out which would be virtually impossible. The classic defence would be that the car was a regular model when the policy was taken out and the owner would plead ignorance as to the fact that the modification needed to be notified. So you don't tend to see many prosecutions for making a false statement to obtain insurance in relation to mechanical modifications.

An insurance company can't repudiate a policy even if it was obtained by fraud so the couldn't repudiate a policy even if there was an unapproved modification.
The only thing the insurance company can do is pay out and sue the policy holder for breach of contract. I can't see how a charge of having no insurance can stick in the circumstances. The injured third party is protected which is the point of compulsory insurance.

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

An insurance company can't repudiate a policy even if it was obtained by fraud so the couldn't repudiate a policy even if there was an unapproved modification.
The only thing the insurance company can do is pay out and sue the policy holder for breach of contract. I can't see how a charge of having no insurance can stick in the circumstances. The injured third party is protected which is the point of compulsory insurance.

Are you sure about that? Obtaining insurance by providing details which are untrue seems to be a clear violation of the terms under which it is offered so it is likely to be invalidated.

http://m.independent.ie/life/motoring/car-news/insurance-alert-tiny-modifications-to-cars-can-wipe-out-cover-31273560.html

https://www.chill.ie/blog/honesty-gets-the-best-policy/


http://m.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/honesty-is-the-best-policy-so-be-upfront-with-insurers-30137718.html

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Are you sure about that? Obtaining insurance by providing details which are untrue seems to be a clear violation of the terms under which it is offered so it is likely to be invalidated.

http://m.independent.ie/life/motoring/car-news/insurance-alert-tiny-modifications-to-cars-can-wipe-out-cover-31273560.html

https://www.chill.ie/blog/honesty-gets-the-best-policy/


http://m.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/honesty-is-the-best-policy-so-be-upfront-with-insurers-30137718.html

The insurance company has to pay the injured Third Party. The prospects of an injured Third party cannot be affected by a finding of invalidity. Nothing in your link says otherwise.

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

The insurance company has to pay the injured Third Party. The prospects of an injured Third party cannot be affected by a finding of invalidity. Nothing in your link says otherwise.

Not even an insurance company stating that your policy may be invalid if you are not honest? That is pretty much an insurance company saying otherwise.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Not even an insurance company stating that your policy may be invalid if you are not honest? That is pretty much an insurance company saying otherwise.

The insurance company can sue their own policy holder for the invalidity. Insurance companies always try to get out of paying anything and will; always issue propaganda. there is an EU Directive which outlaws a refusal to pay on the grounds of the mechanical condition of the vehicle.

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30db6d49844d083d43a88222993615715def.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuLaxr0?text=&docid=99841&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1379064

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

The insurance company can sue their own policy holder for the invalidity. Insurance companies always try to get out of paying anything and will; always issue propaganda. there is an EU Directive which outlaws a refusal to pay on the grounds of the mechanical condition of the vehicle.

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30db6d49844d083d43a88222993615715def.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuLaxr0?text=&docid=99841&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1379064

Read the articles again, the case you linked to related to a case where the driver broke the law by being intoxicated and the ruling says that even though it was illegal to be driving while intoxicated, this could not be used as a reason for the insurance company not to pay out. Also, in the first paragraph you will see that local laws apply.

"A request for a pre- liminary ruling from a national court may be rejected only if it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law sought by that court bears no relation to the actual nature of the case or the subject-matter of the main action."

Most insurers in Irelend require proof of NCT for car insurance, without it the policy is invalid. The links above outline that it is a condition of the insurance being offered that you are honest in your answers and inform them of any modifications made, without that your policy may be invalidated and you are not insured in the case of an accident.

The MIBI do have a compensation scheme for people injured by non insured drivers.

4ensic15

davo10 wrote: »

Read the articles again. Most insurers in Irelend require proof of NCT for car insurance, without it the policy is invalid. The links above outline that it is a condition of the insurance being offered that you are honest in your answers and inform them of any modifications made, without that your policy may be invalidated and you are not insured in the case of an accident.

The MIBI do have a compensation scheme for people injured by non insured drivers.

The situation is that from a Third party point of view the case is dealt with by the insurer not the MIBI. The insurance company has to sue their own policy holder for breach of contract if they pay out. There is an offence of obtaining insurance by deception. you have obviously not read the Bernaldez judgement.

davo10

4ensic15 wrote: »

. There is an offence of obtaining insurance by deception. you have obviously not read the Bernaldez judgement.

I have, and I understand it.

Veloce

Say for example, a person takes out an insurance policy. He/she states there are no modifications to the car at the time of taking out the insurance policy - which is true. Then a few months into the contract, decides to change the exhaust or remaps the car's ECU with the overall aim to increase the power output of the car. But doesn't tell the insurance company that this was done at the time. Can this fall under obtaining insurance by deception?

On another note - I believe the insurance company must pay out to third parties in the event of an accident at fault. The insurance company can recoup third party payouts by way of law suit if they deemed that your insurance was invalid at the time of the accident.

coylemj

Veloce wrote: »

Say for example, a person takes out an insurance policy. He/she states there are no modifications to the car at the time of taking out the insurance policy - which is true. Then a few months into the contract, decides to change the exhaust or remaps the car's ECU with the overall aim to increase the power output of the car. But doesn't tell the insurance company that this was done at the time. Can this fall under obtaining insurance by deception?

No, what matters is what applied at the time the policy was taken out which in your example discloses no offence as you didn't make a false or misleading statement to obtain the policy.

64.—(1) A person shall not, for the purpose or in the course of obtaining the issue of an approved policy of insurance ........ commit any fraud or make any representation or statement (whether in writing or verbally or by conduct) which is to his knowledge false or misleading in any material respect.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/64/enacted/en/html#sec64

Veloce wrote: »

On another note - I believe the insurance company must pay out to third parties in the event of an accident at fault. The insurance company can recoup third party payouts by way of law suit if they deemed that your insurance was invalid at the time of the accident.

Which they would not be able to do unless you owned your own house and had sufficient equity (value of the house minus the outstanding mortgage) to justify being sued. Effectively that sanction is never applied - have you ever heard of the sheriff evicting someone from their house because they were sued by their insurance company or the MIBI?

Claw Hammer

coylemj wrote: »

No, what matters is what applied at the time the policy was taken out which in your example discloses no offence as you didn't make a false or misleading statement to obtain the policy.

64.—(1) A person shall not, for the purpose or in the course of obtaining the issue of an approved policy of insurance ........ commit any fraud or make any representation or statement (whether in writing or verbally or by conduct) which is to his knowledge false or misleading in any material respect.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/64/enacted/en/html#sec64



Which they would not be able to do unless you owned your own house and had sufficient equity (value of the house minus the outstanding mortgage) to justify being sued. Effectively that sanction is never applied - have you ever heard of the sheriff evicting someone from their house because they were sued by their insurance company or the MIBI?

It has happened in numerous cases that a person has claimed compensation for an injury and the MIBI or an insurance company has turned up and garnisheed the award to recover monies previously paid out.