Garda Traffic on Twitter

Chiparus · 11-03-2017 07:10PM

Riva10 wrote: »

Put the onus on the insurance companies to keep the database up to date, and there should not be a problem. Any wrongful seizure, then the owner should be compensated by the relevant insurance company. (Some hope)
Is this signalling the end of the physical tax disc as in the UK?

Could cost the guards (i.e. us ) a lot.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/tycoon-gets-15000-over-car-seizure-by-gardai-26538219.html

pablo128 · 11-03-2017 07:36PM

punisher5112 wrote: »

Imagine they would be a few feet from station and end up stuck there for the rest of the shift as so many are driving other motors even to get away with insurance costs.

I can insure something small then drive around in a souped up turbo.

Why would they be stuck in the station? The idea is to use the on board computer.

Atlantic Dawn · 11-03-2017 08:00PM

Sure why would you need a working brake caliper

...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840625242926137346

punisher5112 · 11-03-2017 08:06PM

pablo128 wrote: »

Why would they be stuck in the station? The idea is to use the on board computer.

Never said in station. What I mean is they would be extremely busy pulling most cars over outside so wouldn't get very far.

Voodoomelon · 11-03-2017 08:11PM

One in fourteen cars have no insurance. If you break that down further by year, i'd say if a Garda passes something older than 2000 like that black Polo above with a young driver, there's a huge chance it has no insurance. Maybe one in three or higher.

blackbird99 · 11-03-2017 08:13PM

another 3 wheeler http://clareherald.com/2017/03/woman-arrested-in-car-with-three-wheels-91116/

AndrewJRenko · 11-03-2017 09:01PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Are you sure about the second part?

Even so, they could question the 'main driver' issue. If you're not the main driver of the car that you are insured on, there is no valid policy.

Fred Swanson · 11-03-2017 09:05PM

This post has been deleted.

GM228 · 11-03-2017 09:16PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are you sure about the second part?

Even so, they could question the 'main driver' issue. If you're not the main driver of the car that you are insured on, there is no valid policy.

A lot of insurers actually don't stipulate the other car is insured, infact oddly enough some specifically state :-

We will cover you driving any other motor car as long as:-

<snip>

"cover is not provided by any other insurance".

Being main driver is irrelevant when driving other cars as you are still the main driver of the vehicle mentioned on your own policy, I assume that is what you mean as that statement is a bit confusing.

Sam Russell · 11-03-2017 09:25PM

I would imagine new legislation would be required.

1. Gardai see ANPR alert and pull over driver. Gardai ask driver for licence and insurance. [Licence must be produced, insurance in 10 days to selected Garda Station]. If no licence, and car is not covered, car in impounded.

2. ANPR surveillance vehicle records all vehicles passing and issues FCPN for any vehicle not covered. The owner/driver has 10 days to produce at Garda Station, and if it proves the vehicle is covered, FCPN is cancelled.

New legislation is required to put the onus on driver to carry licence and to be insured. Failure to carry licence, and vehicle not covered, allows Gardai to seize vehicle. Obviously, Gardai could form the opinion that there is cover and so just require proof to be shown at the Garda Station in 10 days and driver can continue.

If you drive another car on your own insurance, you should/must put the disc from your car onto the borrowed car as you are required to have a valid disc to show insurance. You prove the disc is valid by showing the certificate of insurance to the Garda (within 10 days at the selected Garda station).

I think this would work. Once a vehicle is identified as uninsured, the Gardai just need to follow it up, they do not need to grab every uninsured car on the side of the road, although a bit of hi-viz does not do much harm.

GM228 · 11-03-2017 09:44PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

New legislation is required to put the onus on driver to carry licence and to be insured.

Legislation already requires you to carry your licence at all times.

To change the law to require a licence be on your person or else the insurance becones invalid would be in violation of EU law as the minimum third party insurance is mandatory which is all you get anyway on the driving other cars extension.

Sam Russell wrote: »

If you drive another car on your own insurance, you should/must put the disc from your car onto the borrowed car as you are required to have a valid disc to show insurance. You prove the disc is valid by showing the certificate of insurance to the Garda (within 10 days at the selected Garda station).

Currently what you suggest is illegal, having the original disc and requiring the policy be produced within 10 days is no different to the current position as you have to produce within 10 days either way. You also create the possibility of your own car being driver by a named policy holder on your policy driving without a valid insurance disc on your primary vehicle whilst your are driving the other car.

You are also not required to display a valid insurance disc for the first 10 days of cover coming into force on the particular vehicle, this does not apply to a vehicle which hasn't got an insurance disc of it's own, so if you are driving it on your own policy there is no requirement to display a valid insurance disc.

Sam Russell · 11-03-2017 09:50PM

GM228 wrote: »

Legislation already requires you to carry your licence at all times.

To change the law to require a licence be on your person or else the insurance becones invalid would be in violation of EU law as the minimum third party insurance is mandatory which is all you get anyway on the driving other cars extension.

The driving licence is to satisfy the Garda that the driver has one, and that the licence refers to the driver. There is no intention on my part to suggest that insurance would be invalid. The new legislation would be to put the onus on the driver and absolve the Gardai of any liability if the driver fails to produce it when requested - we cannot have the Gardai being sued for doing their duty.

GM228 · 11-03-2017 09:56PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

The driving licence is to satisfy the Garda that the driver has one, and that the licence refers to the driver. There is no intention on my part to suggest that insurance would be invalid. The new legislation would be to put the onus on the driver and absolve the Gardai of any liability if the driver fails to produce it when requested - we cannot have the Gardai being sued for doing their duty.

But that is already the case.

What do you think the Gardaí could be sued for, negligence - that can't actually happen as you can't sue the Gardaí for negligence for any actions (or lack of) arising from their prosecutorial or investigatory functions.

AndrewJRenko · 11-03-2017 10:02PM

GM228 wrote: »

A lot of insurers actually don't stipulate the other car is insured, infact oddly enough some specifically state :-

We will cover you driving any other motor car as long as:-

<snip>

"cover is not provided by any other insurance".

My own policy says; "We will provide you with third party insurance cover to drive another private car not belonging to you. Occupational and age restrictions may apply."

So nothing about it being insured elsewhere there - good point.

GM228 wrote: »

Being main driver is irrelevant when driving other cars as you are still the main driver of the vehicle mentioned on your own policy, I assume that is what you mean as that statement is a bit confusing.

It depends whether it is a one-off incident or a regular incident. If regular, it raises questions about whether the driver is the main driver of the car that he is mainly insured on, and whether the listed main driver of the other car is actually the main driver of that other car, assuming it is insured by someone else.

GM228 · 11-03-2017 10:13PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It depends whether it is a one-off incident or a regular incident. If regular, it raises questions about whether the driver is the main driver of the car that he is mainly insured on, and whether the listed main driver of the other car is actually the main driver of that other car, assuming it is insured by someone else.

Being the main driver and actually driving your own car are not the same though, you could be the main driver of your own car, but rarely actually use it (i.e keep it idle - I could drive my car once a year, if no-one else uses it I am still the main driver of the car), instead use another car for whatever reason, technically nothing wrong with that from your point of view.

Obviously if the other car is insured by someone else there is a doubt over them being the main driver of the vehicle you are using, but that is an issue between them and their insurer.

Shannon757 · 11-03-2017 10:13PM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840625242926137346

boardsuser1 · 12-03-2017 09:38AM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840699608393252865

boardsuser1 · 12-03-2017 09:38AM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840700693530984448

boardsuser1 · 12-03-2017 09:39AM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840659568178933760

boardsuser1 · 12-03-2017 09:39AM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840665354154196992

boardsuser1 · 12-03-2017 09:40AM

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840669615831289856

Chiparus · 12-03-2017 10:06AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would imagine new legislation would be required.

1. Gardai see ANPR alert and pull over driver. Gardai ask driver for licence and insurance. [Licence must be produced, insurance in 10 days to selected Garda Station]. If no licence, and car is not covered, car in impounded.

2. ANPR surveillance vehicle records all vehicles passing and issues FCPN for any vehicle not covered. The owner/driver has 10 days to produce at Garda Station, and if it proves the vehicle is covered, FCPN is cancelled.

New legislation is required to put the onus on driver to carry licence and to be insured. Failure to carry licence, and vehicle not covered, allows Gardai to seize vehicle. Obviously, Gardai could form the opinion that there is cover and so just require proof to be shown at the Garda Station in 10 days and driver can continue.

If you drive another car on your own insurance, you should/must put the disc from your car onto the borrowed car as you are required to have a valid disc to show insurance. You prove the disc is valid by showing the certificate of insurance to the Garda (within 10 days at the selected Garda station).

I think this would work. Once a vehicle is identified as uninsured, the Gardai just need to follow it up, they do not need to grab every uninsured car on the side of the road, although a bit of hi-viz does not do much harm.

I had a friend who was left on the side of the road In Waterford, because APNR said he had no insurance, forced to take a train back to Dublin.

Car had to shipped back to him the next day. When to computer error was fixed!

AndrewJRenko · 12-03-2017 10:12AM

GM228 wrote: »

Being the main driver and actually driving your own car are not the same though, you could be the main driver of your own car, but rarely actually use it (i.e keep it idle - I could drive my car once a year, if no-one else uses it I am still the main driver of the car), instead use another car for whatever reason, technically nothing wrong with that from your point of view.

Obviously if the other car is insured by someone else there is a doubt over them being the main driver of the vehicle you are using, but that is an issue between them and their insurer.

The scenario you outline is fairly unlikely. Why would you be insuring a car to keep it idle?

And the question of the main driver of the other vehicle is an issue between the owner of that vehicle, the insurer of that vehicle and the Gardai, if they take a view that the terms of the policy are being breached.

job seeker · 12-03-2017 01:14PM

https://mobile.twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/840882790908469249

crasy dash · 12-03-2017 02:20PM

Waterford Traffic MIT C/Point Arrest driver for Drunk Driving gave false name. Unlawfully at large & Disqualified. Charged & taken to Prison https://t.co/3lnof0AwWh

job seeker · 12-03-2017 03:49PM

crasy dash wrote: »

Waterford Traffic MIT C/Point Arrest driver for Drunk Driving gave false name. Unlawfully at large & Disqualified. Charged & taken to Prison https://t.co/3lnof0AwWh

I don't know about everyone else, but when I read a post here it makes me feel quite smug, known that the driver is receiving their just desserts.. :cool::)

colm_mcm · 12-03-2017 05:00PM

I don't think they get desserts in prison?

Fred Swanson · 12-03-2017 05:05PM

This post has been deleted.

ml100 · 12-03-2017 05:09PM

These guys don't see prison, I always wondered when I read in the paper that someone had 100 previous convictions, I just couldn't see how they would get caught by the guards that many times committing burglaries etc, but looking at this thread I wonder how many of the convictions are motoring, they just don't give a f..k, drive when disqualified, drunk etc, the law has no effect on these guys, they don't have to worry about convictions increasing their insurance as they have no intention of ever paying for it

job seeker · 12-03-2017 05:24PM

colm_mcm wrote: »

I don't think they get desserts in prison?

:pac::pac::pac: I'd say far from it!

Garda Traffic on Twitter

Comments