"Driving without insurance" conviction spent after 7 years?

moerkel

Hi there,

I got convicted for driving without insurance in 2010.
Shame on me, I know, I know, let's say the punishment of the insurance companies in the last years really made me never thinking about driving without insurance again.

I just heard about the Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions and Certain Disclosures) Act 2016.
Now I really don't get this law speech and just want to make sure that I got this all right.

My 7th anniversary from conviction date will be in 5 weeks.
All I can find are the exclusion of dangerous driving and if there are 3 convictions (I only have 1).

Please, please, please tell me now that my expected live time punishment will find an early end October.

Can I start a normal life again?
Do I have to do anything for it?
Can I ignore the assumption "Never being convicted" from October?

Thanks,
Mirco

Skatedude

It depends on the insurer asking the question, "Have you ever had a driving conviction?" and you will have to answer yes. But some companies will only ask if you have had a diving conviction in the last 5 years, which you can answer no.

L1011

Skatedude wrote: »

It depends on the insurer asking the question, "Have you ever had a driving conviction?" and you will have to answer yes. But some companies will only ask if you have had a diving conviction in the last 5 years, which you can answer no.

A spent conviction no longer exists for purposes of that question; that is the entire point of the legislation

If it was possible to get around it by asking the question differently, they wouldn't have bothered.

Liam McPoyle

L1011 wrote: »

A spent conviction no longer exists for purposes of that question; that is the entire point of the legislation

If it was possible to get around it by asking the question differently, they wouldn't have bothered.

If someone is asked about previous convictions then they should answer yes if they have them, even if they are now spent.

The spent convictions ruling means that insurers cannot decline or penalise someone that had a conviction that is now spent.

It does not mean proposers can lie on their application.

Time

Business Cat wrote: »

If someone is asked about previous convictions then they should answer yes if they have them, even if they are now spent.

The spent convictions ruling means that insurers cannot decline or penalise someone that had a conviction that is now spent.

It does not mean proposers can lie on their application.

No they shouldn't answer yes, as the wording of the act says nothing about people not being penalised. The wording of the Act is very clear that under law you are not required to disclose any spent conviction. The limitations to this are set out under S.8 which specifically says that only insurance fraud must be disclosed on a proposal form.

Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions and Certain Disclosures) Act 2016 wrote:

6. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, where a person has a conviction which is, in accordance with this Part, regarded as a spent conviction, he or she shall not be required by—

(a) any rule of law, or

(b) by the provisions of any agreement or arrangement which purport to require the person to disclose the conviction or any circumstances ancillary to the conviction,

to disclose that conviction or the circumstances ancillary thereto.

Sleeper12

The spent conviction act does not mean that you can lie. If asked by insurance company you must tell about the conviction. The act means that the insurance company cannot penalise you for your conviction. Most companies ignored the conviction after 10 years anyway. The act is more important for people who have spent time in jail (12 months or less).
Other questions you must answer truthfully:have you ever been refused insurance, have you ever been disqualified from driving, have you ever had a driving conviction, have you ever had a conviction. Even if you are not asked these things you should me them. There is a get out of jail free card on all proposals /policies. It's in the small print and says something like if you fail to inform them of anything that might be relevant then the policy is null and void

Time

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The spent conviction act does not mean that you can lie. If asked by insurance company you must tell about the conviction. The act means that the insurance company cannot penalise you for your conviction. Most companies ignored the conviction after 10 years anyway. The act is more important for people who have spent time in jail (12 months or less).
Other questions you must answer truthfully:have you ever been refused insurance, have you ever been disqualified from driving, have you ever had a driving conviction, have you ever had a conviction. Even if you are not asked these things you should me them. There is a get out of jail free card on all proposals /policies. It's in the small print and says something like if you fail to inform them of anything that might be relevant then the policy is null and void

Where does the act say that though? Section 6 gives effect to the spent convictions and 6.(1) states that a person is not required by any rule of law or by any arrangement or agreement to disclose the conviction. It is not lying as the conviction is spent, and the purpose of the act is stated as being 'An Act to make provision for the limitation of the effect of certain criminal convictions in certain circumstances and after certain periods of time'

Then the limitations of S.6 are covered in S.8 onwards until Part II of the Act and all it says in relation to insurance is

"(2) A person who is convicted of fraud, deceit or dishonesty in respect of a claim under a policy of insurance or a policy of assurance shall not be excused under section 6 from disclosing any such conviction on any insurance proposal or form or any assurance proposal or form, as the case may be."

gustafo

i have a few spent convictions and i certainly say NO when they ask me the question do i have any convictions. there is a reason why this law was brought in and if god forbid i had an accident and the insurance won't cover me any judge in the land will back me because it's there in black and white.

boardsuser1

gustafo wrote: »

i have a few spent convictions and i certainly say NO when they ask me the question do i have any convictions. there is a reason why this law was brought in and if god forbid i had an accident and the insurance won't cover me any judge in the land will back me because it's there in black and white.

A few? I thought mine were spent until last week, they ain't apparently. Ball and chain.

L1011

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The spent conviction act does not mean that you can lie.

You're not lying - the conviction no longer exists for those purposes

Insurers cannot get around this by asking the question differently; although they'd love to.

Henry Ford III

http://www.aviva.ie/media-library/EMOMG13056-02.2017-Private-Car-Insurance-Proposal-Form.pdf

Worth reading.

GM228

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The spent conviction act does not mean that you can lie. If asked by insurance company you must tell about the conviction.

The law states you don't have to disclose, it trumps any contractual requirement.

Henry Ford III wrote: »

http://www.aviva.ie/media-library/EMOMG13056-02.2017-Private-Car-Insurance-Proposal-Form.pdf

Worth reading.

From the Aviva document:-

An individual is not required to disclose a spent conviction when supplying information on past convictions. To determine whether or not a conviction is a “spent conviction” under the Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions and Certain Disclosures) Act 2016 please visit www.Irishstatutebook.ie

grogi

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The spent conviction act does not mean that you can lie. If asked by insurance company you must tell about the conviction.

Does insurance company have any right to ask about spent convictions?

GM228 wrote: »

The law states you don't have t disclose, it trumps any contractual requirement.

You've beaten me again...

GM228

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

A few? I thought mine were spent until last week, they ain't apparently. Ball and chain.

Depends on the conviction, all Road Traffic offences (except dangerous driving) and some Public Order offences are not subject to the one offence limit.