Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Court summons no insurance

Options
  • 26-11-2020 5:53am
    #1
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭


    So I was stopped at checkpoint about 6 months ago driving my English plated car. I was driving the car third party extension on the bases the car wasn't in my name yet due to vrt which was booked for the next week. The garda seized the car and done me for no insurance at 3 am in the morning and when the car reached impound lot allowed my friend to drive it out at 5 am that morning on the same policy as my own. I rang my own insurance the next day and they spend the day deciding if I was covered or not to drive the car and they decided I was. Fair enough 6 months down the road i get two summons one for no producing insurance when asked for it and no approved insurance policy. He basically said on that night that I paid money for the car therefore I couldn't drive it third party but I was stopped earlier in the week by other garda in another town and produced the cert I had for the third party and they were happy with it.
    I've never been involved with the garda before and terrified I'm going to lose my licence. I already have 2 points which were given to me on the same night for no n plates which I forgot to put up and I paid my fine for it. So If I get 5 more from this I'll lose my licence. Since the car been vrtd, its taxed, insured and nct on it.
    Also I rang a number of times to my insurance company to check I was covered to drive the car third party on uk plates as long as it wasn't in my name. Have I a chance of it being striked out of court? The garda not the nicest person btw.


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Skill Magill
    Registered Users Posts: 2,568 ✭✭✭Skill Magill


    MinniexD wrote: »
    I rang my own insurance the next day and they spend the day deciding if I was covered or not to drive the car and they decided I was..

    If you can get this in writing to show the judge, problem solved no?


  • Options
    #3
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    Skill Magill wrote: »
    If you can get this in writing to show the judge, problem solved no?

    I don't know? They wouldn't send out a letter to me about it but just to show the garda the policy booklet where it states it. I didn't go near the garda because being honest, I felt so imitated, I was so scared. Could a solicitor get letter off them to show the judge? I've never been through anything like this and trying to sort a solicitor.


  • Options
    #4
    meathstevie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    Sorry OP but the first sentence in your post confirms the Garda’s suspicion. If the car wasn’t in your name while on it’s UK reg who’s name was it in ? The last registered owner in the UK ?


  • Options
    #5
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    meathstevie wrote: »
    Sorry OP but the first sentence in your post confirms the Garda’s suspicion. If the car wasn’t in your name while on it’s UK reg who’s name was it in ? The last registered owner in the UK ?

    Yes it was.


  • Options
    #6
    meathstevie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    MinniexD wrote: »
    Yes it was.

    I suppose you also told the Garda that you were waiting for your VRT appointment, as in having made an indirect admission that you had bought the car.

    You need to go and see a solicitor as soon as possible.

    As for feeling intimidated, Gardai when suspecting an offence quite often need to be quite assertive and direct with the person they suspect as not doing so wouldn’t get them very far in most investigations.

    It can be a bit unsettling but as long as the Garda wasn’t unnecessarily rude, forceful or violent you probably experienced the discomfort of being investigated on suspicion of having committed an offence. Again, go see a solicitor.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Meeoow
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    It wasn't in your name yet, but you owned it, so you shouldn't have been driving it on third party insurance. You stated that you were pulled earlier in the week, and another guard accepted your story. You were lucky then.


  • Options
    #8
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    meathstevie wrote: »
    I suppose you also told the Garda that you were waiting for your VRT appointment, as in having made an indirect admission that you had bought the car.

    You need to go and see a solicitor as soon as possible.

    As for feeling intimidated, Gardai when suspecting an offence quite often need to be quite assertive and direct with the person they suspect as not doing so wouldn’t get them very far in most investigations.

    It can be a bit unsettling but as long as the Garda wasn’t unnecessarily rude, forceful or violent you probably experienced the discomfort of being investigated on suspicion of having committed an offence. Again, go see a solicitor.


    I did of course. I showed him the text for vrt and even made sure I rang the insurance company straight after with the new registration number. I wouldn't have driven the car if I didn't think I was insured to drive it.
    I was very imitated because my friend arrived to where I was and was told if she had been 20 mins earlier, she could have drove the car away and no need for recovery truck. She showed him her insurance cert on a phone and he never took a copy of mine or hers when the car was being released at the station. I didn't have to proof anything to get the car our for her to drive of the impound. It was very upsetting as it was my first time ever in trouble.


  • Options
    #9
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    Meeoow wrote: »
    It wasn't in your name yet, but you owned it, so you shouldn't have been driving it on third party insurance. You stated that you were pulled earlier in the week, and another guard accepted your story. You were lucky then.

    Even though the insurance company were happy to say I was covered and when I checked with them on number of occasions, I was told I was covered even though I was waiting for vrt.


  • Options
    #10
    Meeoow
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    MinniexD wrote: »
    Even though the insurance company were happy to say I was covered and when I checked with them on number of occasions, I was told I was covered even though I was waiting for vrt.

    Sure see what the judge says in court. You can explain your case then.


  • Options
    #11
    meathstevie
    Registered Users Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    MinniexD wrote: »
    I did of course. I showed him the text for vrt and even made sure I rang the insurance company straight after with the new registration number. I wouldn't have driven the car if I didn't think I was insured to drive it.
    I was very imitated because my friend arrived to where I was and was told if she had been 20 mins earlier, she could have drove the car away and no need for recovery truck. She showed him her insurance cert on a phone and he never took a copy of mine or hers when the car was being released at the station. I didn't have to proof anything to get the car our for her to drive of the impound. It was very upsetting as it was my first time ever in trouble.

    In as far as “being in trouble” goes it’s not the end of the world. There’s hundreds of people answering charges very similar to your own in District Courts all over the country every week. You’ll see it when you go up there, you’ll be far from alone.

    I’m not a solicitor and this is not legal advice but judges generally appreciate that a defendant attends on time, appropriately dressed and addresses the court in a respectful manner when asked to do so. Again, a solicitor will keep you right for the few minutes it’ll take.

    As for the Garda letting your friend drive your car out of the impound yard that’s quite straightforward. Once he was satisfied that she had a license and insurance covering her to drive your car he had no reason to not let her.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    meathstevie wrote: »
    In as far as “being in trouble” goes it’s not the end of the world. There’s hundreds of people answering charges very similar to your own in District Courts all over the country every week. You’ll see it when you go up there, you’ll be far from alone.

    I’m not a solicitor and this is not legal advice but judges generally appreciate that a defendant attends on time, appropriately dressed and addresses the court in a respectful manner when asked to do so. Again, a solicitor will keep you right for the few minutes it’ll take.

    As for the Garda letting your friend drive your car out of the impound yard that’s quite straightforward. Once he was satisfied that she had a license and insurance covering her to drive your car he had no reason to not let her.


    Apologies just so terrified about it. It's not till March so I just praying and hoping it can be sorted before then.


  • Options
    #13
    whomitconcerns
    Registered Users Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭whomitconcerns


    If the car was beneficially owned by you then you were not entitled to utilise 3rd party extension on it. And you were not insured.

    It might not have been in your name in Shannon, but you owned it.

    So the guard was correct, your insurance company was not. So I hope you had their statement that you were covered, in writing!


  • Options
    #14
    Meeoow
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    She wasn't insured, in fact, her friend was lucky to get the car out, as there was no insurance policy on the car.
    I bought a UK car years ago, got my insurance changed over to it. The insurance company will insure a UK car until it is vrt'd.


  • Options
    #15
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    whomitconcerns wrote: »
    If the car was beneficially owned by you then you were not entitled to utilise 3rd party extension on it. And you were not insured.

    It might not have been in your name in Shannon, but you owned it.

    So the guard was correct, your insurance company was not. So I hope you had their statement that you were covered, in writing!

    So pretty much it's an technical between insurance company and garda. Thank you for your input


  • Options
    #16
    whomitconcerns
    Registered Users Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭whomitconcerns


    Meeoow wrote: »
    She wasn't insured, in fact, her friend was lucky to get the car out, as there was no insurance policy on the car.
    I bought a UK car years ago, got my insurance changed over to it. The insurance company will insure a UK car until it is vrt'd.

    The op wasn't covered as they owned the vehicle but the friend potentially was insured depending on her policies conditions.

    For instance mine never required the other vehicle to have its own policy in place.

    The actual solution here would have been for the op to get their own insurance temporarily transferred to the UK plate car.


  • Options
    #17
    Meeoow
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    whomitconcerns wrote: »

    For instance mine never required the other vehicle to have its own policy in plac were.

    Really? I thought that there had to be insurance on the vehicle to enable third party. My bad.


  • Options
    #18
    whomitconcerns
    Registered Users Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭whomitconcerns


    Meeoow wrote: »
    Really? I thought that there had to be insurance on the vehicle to enable third party. My bad.

    Depends on the policy, it's getting more common now that they do require it


  • Options
    #19
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    Meeoow wrote: »
    Really? I thought that there had to be insurance on the vehicle to enable third party. My bad.

    No there doesn't. My own policy doesn't require it to be on the other car.


  • Options
    #20
    Meeoow
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    MinniexD wrote: »
    No there doesn't. My own policy doesn't require it to be on the other car.

    Is that your imaginary policy?


  • Options
    #21
    sidcon
    Registered Users Posts: 632 ✭✭✭sidcon


    MinniexD wrote: »
    So pretty much it's an technical between insurance company and garda. Thank you for your input

    No technicality, the car is insured for theft, fire and damage. That's what 3rd party insurance is. Insurance done the job. Its not insured to drive on the road as it did not meet the legal rules of the road requirements. That would have been the drivers responsibility.
    OP has said that they have verbal acknowledgement from insurance company, however unless they can back it up then I'm afraid they will have to face facts of no insurance to drive the car at that time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Cows Go µ
    Registered Users Posts: 902 ✭✭✭Cows Go µ


    Some policies require the other car to be insured but not all do - I think it's just Aviva and Liberty at the moment.

    The insurance company's responce might have depended on what was said. For instance if you said, I don't own the car then they would have said that you were covered to drive. If you had said I bought the car and it just isn't in my name yet then they should have told you that you weren't insured. The person in the insurance company was definitely wrong.

    Once you buy the car, you can't used your driving of other cars extension. There would have been no reason at the time to not have your own insurance policy transferred onto your new car rather than using a third party extension to drive jt


  • Options
    #23
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    Meeoow wrote: »
    Is that your imaginary policy?

    No need to be rude.


  • Options
    #24
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    Cows Go µ wrote: »
    Some policies require the other car to be insured but not all do - I think it's just Aviva and Liberty at the moment.

    The insurance company's responce might have depended on what was said. For instance if you said, I don't own the car then they would have said that you were covered to drive. If you had said I bought the car and it just isn't in my name yet then they should have told you that you weren't insured. The person in the insurance company was definitely wrong.

    Once you buy the car, you can't used your driving of other cars extension. There would have been no reason at the time to not have your own insurance policy transferred onto your new car rather than using a third party extension to drive jt

    They knew I had the car bought and was in ireland at the time. I do know all the calls are recorded when we had the discussion.


  • Options
    #25
    square ball
    Registered Users Posts: 391 ✭✭square ball


    MinniexD wrote: »
    They knew I had the car bought and was in ireland at the time. I do know all the calls are recorded when we had the discussion.

    Unless the car was in your name at the time the guards or courts cannot prove that you owned the car. Therefore your third party extension may cover you. If you can produce your logbook or other evidence showing date the car was changed into your name along with proof of third party extension (on your insurance cert) there should be no case against you.


  • Options
    #26
    Cows Go µ
    Registered Users Posts: 902 ✭✭✭Cows Go µ


    MinniexD wrote: »
    They knew I had the car bought and was in ireland at the time. I do know all the calls are recorded when we had the discussion.

    It unfortunate when the people working in an insurance company have no clue how insurance works


  • Options
    #27
    triona1
    Registered Users Posts: 593 ✭✭✭triona1


    Just go to court it's up to the judge this will only wreck your head,it's not a spectator's sport nobody only judge will decide the outcome.


  • Options
    #28
    MinniexD
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭MinniexD


    square ball wrote: »
    Unless the car was in your name at the time the guards or courts cannot prove that you owned the car. Therefore your third party extension may cover you. If you can produce your logbook or other evidence showing date the car was changed into your name along with proof of third party extension (on your insurance cert) there should be no case against you.


    I have all the vrt paperwork that was done a week after the incident. It has my head wreaked that the very fact I could end up losing my licence and my job because of this horrible situation


  • Options
    #29
    Eggs For Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,937 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    You owned the car at the time of the incident, you told the Garda it was down for VRT, your insurers are not prepared to put in writing that you were insured, just to show your policy to the Gardai. The name on the log book is incidental.

    I'd imagine the Garda will ask for proof of when you purchased the vehicle and I'd wager the outcome will depend on that.


  • Options
    #30
    Lenar3556
    Registered Users Posts: 1,350 ✭✭✭Lenar3556


    It will ultimately turn on the terms of the insurance policy you intend to rely upon. In any case I have come across, it is a condition of the ‘driving other cars’ extension that you do not own the vehicle.

    The fact that you were not the registered owner is a poor defence. The OP has made admissions to bring the beneficial owner and unless the insurance policy is non-standard, you have a difficulty here.

    The points in relation to the N plates aren’t added to those arising from another offence occurring at the same time, however driving without insurance is one of the more serious road traffic offences - get a solicitor.

    Good luck.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    whomitconcerns
    Registered Users Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭whomitconcerns


    square ball wrote: »
    Unless the car was in your name at the time the guards or courts cannot prove that you owned the car. Therefore your third party extension may cover you. If you can produce your logbook or other evidence showing date the car was changed into your name along with proof of third party extension (on your insurance cert) there should be no case against you.

    Doesn't work that way. You think the person the op bought it from will get involved, say they owned it at the time and that they gave permission to the op to drive it. Not a hope. That's a condition of the third party extension in most cases.



    Even if they did, it would be an obvious attempt to circumvent a conviction and would not be looked on kindly by a judge. I wouldn't risk that


Advertisement