A couple of days ago I half caught an item on the TV news, which if I understood it correctly, suggested that new legislation due to be introduced would mean that 'all' vehicles will have to be insured, regardless of whether its being driven or not.
It didn't mention anything about road worthiness, or circumstances in which a vehicle was being kept and used solely for spares... does any one have any more details?
The message from "Ivan" contains these words:
The only detail that comes to mind immediately is "The insurance companies must be wetting themselves laughing".
No more details, but here is the story:
I noticed this bit:
'But the new powers will make it illegal to own a car without insuring it or declaring that it is not being used.'
I would expect that it will be linked to the SORN system.
Yet more paperwork for NewLabs army my of bureaucrats, plus the added attraction of potential run-ins with the DVLA and insurance companies.
Surely there must be simpler ways of licensing and insuring vehicles without all of the current hassle, how do they manage in other countries, the US for instance.
So it isn't much different from current: If the car is used, it must be insured. If the car is used for spares, you can apparently declare that it isn't being used.
Er no. It'll be more like the current road fund licence system. You need it, or you get a fine, unless you tell them the vehicle is unused.
I can see they are probably planning a collaboration between the data systems.
Very soon we will have the MOT system fully computerised (if they ever get it to work that is), the Vehicle Licensing already is computerised, and Insurance mostly is too.
The idea is that unless your car is showing on the DVLA, MOT and insurers databases as being fully paid up and roadworthy, you get a fine in the post automatically. To avoid this *you* have to advise each of them that the car is off-road.
The message from "mrcheerful ." contains these words:
Most of that seems reasonable - if it's SORNed then it doesn't have to be covered. If it ain't then it has to be insured.
The message from "Ivan" contains these words:
Coming soon, registration, tax and testing for domestic trailers.
But if the car is in regular use, as in my case, then it will always be insured, taxed and MOTed.
I can see a problem if a car fails MOT for some reason and the repair is not straightforward, then it could take some time to weigh up the options and find the funds. It means that you should really book the MOT in the beginning of the month that the MOT expires.
Timing could also be a headache if the MOT date is just before the Road Tax date. In my case there is a 6 months gap.
Well, no car should be driven on the road without insurance, I think that everybody will agree. But the other requirements of strict timing seems a bit mean, probably designed to play musical chairs with the motorists, so as to reduce congestion...
And for TVs. If it's not declared broken or unused then you get an automatic fine for not paying your TV license.
This is OT, but... The TVLA pull a trick by small print that says that they can backdate the TV licence. You get a licence document with an expiry date, so a normal person will think that the TV licence is for a finite period, e.g. like any other contract. But not so. If you want to stop the licence and start again from a new date, then you positively have to inform TVLA that the licence has been stopped.
Isn't that how it works already?
Bloody hell, at last, we've got it!!!!
They give you an entire month before the expiry of the old MOT, to get a new one. In fact, there's nowt to stop you doing it earlier if you have any reservations about it passing.
Yes, but you have a month to do the MOT, and 14 days to get the tax.
They aren't, when an MOT expires, it's expired. Where would you draw the line? 1 day, 2 days, a week, 6 months?
You have as long as you need *before* it expires. Besides which if it's an MOT failure anyway, then it's still illegal to drive - being an unroadworthy car. In which case you *could* be driving uninsured too.
OK, but as I understood your previous post, you could be automatically fined for expired MOT even if the car is not on the road, unless advised to the authorities that it's not on the road.
Guy King ( snipped-for-privacy@zetnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Excellent. About time too.
Also on this subject, I rent a room in my mate's flat and he has a tv licence but I bought a freeview box from Dixons and a week later had a notice from the TVLA to say they noted from records that I had purchased tv receiving equipment but had no licence on record. So Big Brother is most definately watching us!!
Gareth
The message from Adrian contains these words:
Hmm. It'd be interesting to see some statistics on the cost/benefit of the rigmarole involved. Dunno how many accidents are provably caused by defects on trailers which would have been picked up by testing.
And why tax and register 'em?
Guy King ( snipped-for-privacy@zetnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Why register? Because loads of trailers get nicked. Tax? I see no benefit - but they won't miss a trick.
Testing? Abso-bloody-lutely. Seen some of the ropy s**te that gets dragged around?
Yes. That, so far, has not entered the system, but I think it won't be long once the system is up and running.
FWIW, your MOT is immediately available to the Police computer systems.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.