AudiLover

Taken from another forum.

I have created an online petition on the Prime Ministers website about the lack of severe penalties for uninsured drivers. I think it is about time these drivers that drive with no insurance, tax and MOT are given much harsher penalties

some examples from my local rag include a driver fined £80 for no insurance, tax and MOT and given 8 points on his licence! CAR TAX FOR A YEAR COSTS MORE THAN THIS EACH YEAR!!!! and it is a complete joke. I have also inlcuded the fact that any proceeds taken from these illegal drivers should be given to people who suffer at the hands of uninsured drivers through damage to themselves or their cars!
please join me in signing this petition and let as many people know about it as possible. the gov wont listen about road pricing, but might listen about this, as it means more revenue for the gov!

LINK


P.S

Please copy and paste this to as many sites as possible to generate extra signatures. It would benefit all drivers who do abide by the law, and possibly lower all of our insurance premiums, as uninsured drivers have led to some premium rate increases.

Would it be possible for a mod to make this a sticky to all the sections of the forum?

AudiLover

no reply?

So the generalisation that scooby drivers dont invest in insurance must be true then?

turbomatt

iTrader: (1)

Cant be arsed to sign it, too busy working out what scoob mods to buy with my tax and insurance money

NotoriousREV

Signed it as it's the only sensible post you've ever made

KiwiGTI

I'm all petitioned out.

500

Ok Ok, Who's stolen AL's username... Own up whoever you are

bugeyeandy

Waste of time, last major petition on road pricing achieved nothing.

r32

Cant see the point when they ignore a petition with 1.8 million signatures.
Police dont give a sh*t any way. If you cant pick it up on a camera they are not bothered. All the local gypsies drive around blatently with no tax no insurance and the bill dont do a thing.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Maybe this is what that labour MP who claimed that petitions were a threat to democracy really meant!

Nah!! But it's nice to kid yourself that an MP might actually have the brains to work out that it would only take so many petitions to be ignored before petition fatigue kicked in.

Personally, I don't think the road pricing petition was ignored. We'll only be able to say that when it's introduced!

If nothing else it's let the labour spin dept know that it's got its work cut out!

Ns04

PeteBrant

8 points is quite a harsh penalty. The fine is secondary, People avoid insurance because they cant afford to pay it, even if a fine of £2000 were incurred, they still wouldn't be able to pay insurance, it would change nothing.

As for it lowering insurance premiums, I doubt it, even if the death penalty were brought in for Insurance evaders, do you think insurance companies would pass on the savings? Not a chance.

Bit of an ill thought out policy, really.

PeteBrant

Really, the true solution for car insurance, is to have a state run scheme, blanket insurance for everyone at third party, and optional fully comp for and extra premuim.

Never going to happen, but would solve the problem of uninsured drivers overnight.

SirFozzalot

It's only harsh if you need to buy insurance! If he didn't bother last time I doubt he will bother this time, especially now he has 8 points on his licence.

AudiLover

Thats the whole point!!!!!!

If they dont bother to pay for insurance with 0 points on their license they will sure as hell be less likely to get some with 8 therefore the punishment is pointless.

Also for the last couple years the car insurance business has been loosing money!!!!!! The car insurance companies were subsidising the losses out of their own pockets. This has prompted Norwich union to increase their premiums by 11% and other major insurers followed suit.

If you cant afford to drive, you shouldnt be driving. Driving is a privilege, not a god given right!!!

bartmanuk

well said AL.

BM

Minitrue

Sticky? mate; its a pointless post and a useless petition. If the state had any interest in dealing with the issue then theyd have compulsary third party insurance for everyone (included with your RFL) at a cost of about £30 each. It was proposed once in a white paper and completely disregarded: no money in it you see?

Ignorance is Strength!


MoT

paulr

I know people who struggle to pay for insurance (if they have any in the first place). So you fine them loads. Whats the point as they cant pay it anyway. So you take their car off them,then they cant get to work so lose their job and go on benefits. Then their kids grow up in a house with no wage earner.
Its rather like the idea of fining parents who can't control their kids. Good headlines,but totally impractical.

PeteBrant

None of this solves the problem though. You can fine someone all you like, they still aren't going to pay for insurance if they don't have the money.

Some people will always drive uninsured, it is just a fact of life, and no amount of fines will stop that.

Even banning outright (i,e, adding 12 points for being caught without insurance) is not going to stop those people being on road if they feel they have no choice.

State provided thrid party insurance is the only complete solution - You then top this up to fully comp with insurance companies should you wish to.

That's what this petition should be calling for, a solution to the problem, not penalties.

falkster

I think there are that many petitions for thsi and that it just becomes pointless! No-one (in power) will listen as they are getting hit everyday for cheaper petrol costs, no council tax for old duffers, against pay-as-you-go driving etc etc.

Lets just get a vigilante group together and remove one leg from each offender!!

pwhittle

I disagree. Sure they haven't stated they'd drop itunexpected), but I think the sheer numbers of vocal voters will have made an impression, regardless of what they admit. Their jobs are on the line if the annoy too many people, and they know it.

Leslie

I think that AL's post about this is eminently sensible. I believe it to be a gross offence to drive without insurance in particular. The penalty for that always used to be pretty harsh as it should have been, but these days the penalty seems to make it worth the risk, especially with so few traffic cops around now. To those who say it is not worth the trouble, see how you feel when your car is totalled by an uninsured driver!

Les

paulr

Its never worth the risk of driving a 10k car without insurance and having a blameworthy accident. There's no law that says you have to have home contents insurance,but people do.

PeteBrant

The penalty is still harsh - 8 points is not an insubtantial endorsement.

A fine is completely useless. If someone cannot afford to pay insurance, they cannot afford to pay a fine, it will go to court, and they will pay off any fine at £5 a week.

Leslie

I bet that most of those who drive without insurance have not got a licence to attaach the 8 points to anyway.

Les

Dan W

Don't be complacent about taking on the government. They ignore petitions at their peril. We as a society voted them in and we can vote them out. If we take the view that it is better to do nothing as action doesn't get us anywhere big brother will have won and have us exactly where he wants us.

If you have an opiniton and a voice use them.

AudiLover

I dont want to see uninsured drivers getting higher penalties, I want to see them get put in jail!!!!!

Insuring a rust bucket car isnt all that expensive for a 25yr old so the excuse of them not being able to pay and not being able to get to work doesnt float.

Use public transport I say, or save a little harder to pay for the insurance, tax etc.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Quite!!!! Sick and fecking tired of hearing about Joe Slob, who's been busted for driving without insurance, tax and whilst disqualified 5 times and then only gets a further ban......er, hello, he doesn't care about the ban!!!

People who drive without insurance are a menace and cost the Uk a fortune. People who repeatedly drive without insurance are sticking two fingers up a the law. They should spend some time at HM's pleasure!!!

PeteBrant

Again, doesn't solve the problem.

The fact you make a harsher punishment for non-payment of car insurance does not stop it from happening.

Realistically a prison term for not paying insurance is not going to happen. ANd even if it did, is ot going to repair the cars of those people affected? Nope.

The simple fact is some people cannot, or will not pay car insurance, for whatever reason.

So you sort out the issue of insurance, make it so that every one driving is automatically covered third party, problem solved, and no one need go to prison, or end up having to pay for car repairs.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

People have been to prison for not paying council tax.

I'm fundamentally uncomfortable with the notion that: "Well people are going to break the law so we should take measures to ensure the law is essentially redundant".

Having insurance is the law and it's there for a good reason: if you habitually break the law and other forms of punishment don't work, you should go to prison.

I sincerely doubt there are many out there who drve without insurance because they can't afford it, They do it cause they're arrogant and don't care about other people or their property. These are individuals who society can , and should, legitimately punish!

I'm not sure a flat TPFT rate would be workable.

What about people who've bought a car that has a rating that puts it beyond their means? Tough *******, it's is a legitimate function of insurance to provide a financial disincentive for peple jumping into cars that their experience or driving record doesn't warrant! Do we really want these people automatically covered TPFT.

As for people who've had insurance raised beyond their means by offences. Tough *******, don't want the time, don't do the crime. Do we want them covered TPFT?

Young drivers: Hard cheese - we were all young once. Those of us who own fast cars now do so because we paid our dues, didn't end up in a ditch and proved we were up to the responsibility. You might take a bit more care if it's cost you a lot to put the car on the road. Do we want this negated by automatically providing TPFT cover??

What about the implications for the std of driving: I'll buy a shi*heap and drive it like I don't give a ****....I've got no real investment in it, no NCB to loose, no excess, who cares about other people's cars- someone else'll pay. Do you not think this is a likely scenario?

What about the implications for settlments after an accident? Can you See Barry Boi McChav admitting fault after he's plowed into someone if his blinged up Nova is only covered 3rd party whilst Mondeo man has fully comp?? No, he's going to fight it!

Ns04

PeteBrant

Surely if a law in unenforceable, it is fundamentally flawed.

What you are effectively advocating is a retribution system, where by people get punished, to what you see as an acceptable level. Who wins? No one. The car is still a wreck, someone is in jail. All that gets satisfied is some wierd desire to see that someone got thier come uppance.

Well thats unquantifiable, we don't know why people drive uninsured. It's all conjecture. Cost will certainly be an issue though.

As it stands, if you continually drive without insurance, you will be banned from driving. That's enough. What you would hope to achieve by imprisoning them too, I don't know.

This is the beauty of a state Third party system. As it currently stands, thoe only obstacle from driving a ferrari at 18 is the size of your wallet. Similarly those who have commited motoring offences or have a poor dirving record can insure any car they like provided they have the money. A state run system would enable far stricter controls, and it would mean that it wouldn't only be the rich who can drive what they like when they like.

A state run system could ensure that someone who is evidently not able to restrain themselves cannot get ensured on a certain horsepower vehicle no matter how much money they have.

I would have thought this would be right up your alley.

No I don;t think it is - People will still want nice cars, people won't *want* to crash. But everyone will have the peace of mind that there ar eno uninsured drivers on the road. Isn't that the eventual aim?
No different to now - independant assessors will decide. You can tell quite easily who was at fault for most accidents.

paulr

There is a guy at work who i doubt has insurance.

Put him in jail his daughter gets taken into care. Between them they'd cost the natoin a fortune.
Public transport. Try getting a bus into rural Linolnshire at 05.30 Sunday Morning.

I'm not saying its right, but putting them in jail i dont think is the answer.