vehicle ins (again)

[libby lou lou]

Well, it was true after all, your being charged insurance for any vehicles you have up the driveway, sorned or not. Another case of scew the motorist.

So, i'm being forced to scrap/sell 1 campervan, and the other i use for, maybe 5 weeks of the year, keep a full 12months insurance on it, as well as my car.

Why not charged us for tax as well, suppose that's next on the agenda p1s pot government

 

[Diyisfun]

Cant see a problem, if you dont use it 'sorn' it, although must admit I dont know how easy it is to un-sorn.
The reason behind it is there are 1.4 million uninsured cars on the road so they say & it is costing those that are insured an extra £30.

 

[EngStudent]

Well, it was true after all, your being charged insurance for any vehicles you have up the driveway, sorned or not.

You fancy doing a bit more research into that?

The continuous insurance enforcement scheme will provide a new fixed penalty for people who ignore official reminders that their insurance has expired. This will apply to vehicles that are not declared as being off the road through SORN (Statutory Off Road Notification) and not insured.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/Motorinsurance/DG_067639

Declare your vehicles off-road, decide when you'll be needing them and declare them 'active'. Is that so difficult?

Edit: Diyisfun; buying a new tax-disk cancels the SORN.

 

[chainsaw_masochist]

Maybe I am misinformed, but I thought there were government plans to make insurance compulsory even for SORN'd vehicles. If so, then only the vehicle tax would be avoided.

 

[joinerjohn]

I think Eng Student, you'll find that if your vehicle has been SORN'ed and is parked on your driveway without insurance, the police can fine the person who owns the vehicle and either clamp or tow away the vehicle. Read here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...ace-new-fines-under-new-Government-curbs.html

You'd agree that your driveway is private property, yet the police have the powers to seize any uninsured vehicle (even on private property.
So if you buy an old vintage vehicle to restore. First thing to do is SORN it, then apparently you have to insure it too (even though it may not be on the road for years)

I agree with Libby Lou Lou. This law is bloody ridiculous.

 

[joinerjohn]

Maybe I am misinformed, but I thought there were government plans to make insurance compulsory even even for SORN'd vehicles. If so, then only the vehicle tax would be avoided.

Why would someone want to pay road insurance for a vehicle which isn't used on the roads for a period of time though? Knowing how much these licensed robbery companies charge for motor insurance? If a vehicle is off the road and not being used, then surely it doesn't need insurance?

 

[ellal]

Maybe I am misinformed, but I thought there were government plans to make insurance compulsory even even for SORN'd vehicles. If so, then only the vehicle tax would be avoided.

yep, misinformed...

The only way to legally leave a car uninsured will be to make a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN). This requires the motorist either to apply online, by post or in a post office and to crucially, to have a place to store the car off a public highway.

What it does say about the current system is that anpr has failed...because it needs to be manned by plod, despite it being hailed as a 'wonder tool' that 'denies the roads to criminals'...it's actually an after the fact tracking system, and hence the move to this system...

Of course all it'll do will result in an increase in non registered or cloned vehicles...

 

[EngStudent]

I think Eng Student, you'll find that if your vehicle has been SORN'ed and is parked on your driveway without insurance, the police can fine the person who owns the vehicle and either clamp or tow away the vehicle. Read here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...fines-under-new-Government-curbs.html[/QUOTE]

Read the article!

The only way to avoid a fine will be to go through the bureaucratic process of making a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.

This can only be done if the owner can find somewhere to store the vehicle. Uninsured vehicles left in the road would be clamped or seized, penalising those without driveways or private garages.

They can only fine you if it's left on public land. They cannot fine you if it's registered SORN and parked on private land. I registered my car as SORN online. It took less than 5 minutes.

 

[snico]

I think Eng Student, you'll find that if your vehicle has been SORN'ed and is parked on your driveway without insurance, the police can fine the person who owns the vehicle and either clamp or tow away the vehicle. Read here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...ace-new-fines-under-new-Government-curbs.html

You'd agree that your driveway is private property, yet the police have the powers to seize any uninsured vehicle (even on private property.
So if you buy an old vintage vehicle to restore. First thing to do is SORN it, then apparently you have to insure it too (even though it may not be on the road for years)

I agree with Libby Lou Lou. This law is bloody ridiculous.

No thats not right.

If the vehicle is declared SORN, you can leave it on your property without inusrance.

The only issue is for people who do not have a driveway, garage or private land to store the vehicle on. Then if it is SORN they will still have to have it insured.

 

[Whitespirit66]

Being SORNed is technically the same as untaxed. Either way, it can't be stored on a public road.

To all those with untaxed/unused vehicles - just SORN them, and keep them stored off of public roads/property. Simples.

 

[chainsaw_masochist]

[Why would someone want to pay road insurance for a vehicle which isn't used on the roads for a period of time though? Knowing how much these licensed robbery companies charge for motor insurance? If a vehicle is off the road and not being used, then surely it doesn't need insurance?

Actually, it is quite incorrect to describe any government intention to do this as “plans” so I retract that. But I don’t imagine it’s a question of what the public wants, John. More to do with the concerns of a government who will not stop looking for potential tax revenue, especially given the current economic climate. If this did come to pass, I guess there would be at least a reduced premium for the SORN’d vehicle against the one in use?

When you say “these licensed robbery companies” do you mean the current bunch of private equity fund and investment bankers (many of whom are not even UK tax payers) who own the insurers lobbying the government so they can make even more money out of a compulsory expense? Thought so.

yep, misinformed...

I certainly hope you are right.

 

[joinerjohn]

Chainsaw, I reckon I do mean the insurance companies. They've been handed a license to print money from the government determined to squeeze every last penny they can from unsuspecting motorists.
One thing I do wonder about though... . The insurance companies claim that uninsured drivers push up the cost of insurance by £30 per insured driver... How come they keep putting my premiums up by more than that then?

 

[geraint]

so hopefully the poster is wrong...

can anyone clarify... if not taxed and off road that you do NOT need insurance...

maybe i will have to ask ryans solicitor....

 

[ellal]

It's simple...

Get your vehicle a sorn, keep it off the road and you don't need insurance or tax...

 

[chainsaw_masochist]

Chainsaw, I reckon I do mean the insurance companies. They've been handed a license to print money from the government determined to squeeze every last penny they can from unsuspecting motorists.
One thing I do wonder about though... . The insurance companies claim that uninsured drivers push up the cost of insurance by £30 per insured driver... How come they keep putting my premiums up by more than that then?

Absolutely spot on, John. My premiums seem to increase 20% annually for the last three years – prior to that it seemed a lot more stable. Yet the number of road accidents and fatalities continues to decline pretty much year on year. But the point you make re uninsured drivers always perplexes me. If a member of the public is injured due to a criminal act they (should), ultimately, receive compensation from government funds. Well is being uninsured not a criminal act in itself? Then, if that is the case, why should subsequent accident damage not be funded similarly? Why should the law abiding motorist have to suffer these costs being met by the general insurance fund?