Speeding offence knowledge

[Jobbo]

For a long time I've always said I'd aim to be caught at well over the speed limit because you get an automatic ban instead of points. Generally for 14 or 28 days, which isn't too bad compared to the totting-up ban of 6 months.

Having recently been speaking to a barrister who specialises in motoring offences, it turns out the law changed only a year or two ago so that doesn't work now; too many people were using it to get out of the 6 month ban by admitting to an ostensibly more serious offence to get a shorter ban. If you did the same now you'd get the 6 months.

I am pleased to say that this was not in the context of my own offending. I am also pleased to say that the result was no ban. I am not looking forward to the insurance renewal next year. Anyone want to buy an 18 month old Cayenne GTS in a nice spec?

[Matty]

Oof. How fast over?

We don't judge here. At least, only via DM.

[Jobbo]

Totting up, so a number of sub-10mph over offences leaving her on 9 points, then 50 in a 30 which produced 5 points today but (with the benefit of said barrister) no ban. Total 14 points now. I doubt the meerkat will consider insurance for someone with that many points.

I have not commited any recent speeding offences so the change in the law only came up in conversation rather than in response to a need for advice!

[IanF]

And more importantly, how was it your fault that she was speeding!?

[Mito Man]

Ooof.

I reckon it’ll be less bad than expected simple because of the number of taxi drivers that are on silly points. Surely it can’t be too bad as otherwise it would be cheaper to work in a supermarket for them

[V8Granite]

Totting up, so a number of sub-10mph over offences leaving her on 9 points, then 50 in a 30 which produced 5 points today but (with the benefit of said barrister) no ban. Total 14 points now. I doubt the meerkat will consider insurance for someone with that many points.

I have not commited any recent speeding offences so the change in the law only came up in conversation rather than in response to a need for advice!

I reckon you moved the seat, you bastard!

Did the previous points make much of a difference to insurance or do they get arsey when it's over 6 ?

Dave!

[dinny_g]

Yeah I was going to ask is there much difference, Insurance wise, between totting up 12 and getting a 6 month ban and having 1 serious conviction and getting the 14 or 28 day ban ??

[Jobbo]

Only had to declare 6 points last year - I reckon 9 might be the start of issues but if you get caught twice more during the year and it jumps from 6 to 14… well I’ll let you all know around February

[IanF]

Actually, just thinking about my recent coms with Admiral, they chased me as they’d had a notification that a named driver on my policy had more points than declared… took my ex off the policy and got money back!

Also know a chap who crashed his gf’s car, had undeclared driving convictions (think the policy had renewed and they’d forgotten to amend it) and the insurance company eventually agreed to a policy payout minus the difference in premiums she should have paid with his driving convictions… but it wasn’t a smooth process and sounds like the sort of thing to avoid.

Tl;dr - it may be worth informing your insurance provider sooner

[Marv]

Oopsy, I'm guessing a Cayenne GTS dampens the impression of speed quite well then?

[jamcg]

Anyone want to buy an 18 month old Cayenne GTS in a nice spec?

Straight swap for a green Puma? Although bright coloured Ford st’s probably not the easiest to insure after points either

[Simon]

Totting up, so a number of sub-10mph over offences leaving her on 9 points, then 50 in a 30 which produced 5 points today but (with the benefit of said barrister) no ban. Total 14 points now. I doubt the meerkat will consider insurance for someone with that many points.

I have not commited any recent speeding offences so the change in the law only came up in conversation rather than in response to a need for advice!

Interesting - As someone with no experience or knowledge of these matters, I thought 12 pts was an auto-ban unless you could prove hardship or something? Or you were providing care to someone who relied on your ability to drive?

I suppose we might have a Yeti to sell in a few months time.

[Jobbo]

Various grounds for exceptional hardship to avoid a ban, Simon, but yes: starting point is a ban so you need to demonstrate why you shouldn’t get one. If you’re ever in that position use a good motoring lawyer; I now have a recommendation.

Marv, it was in the R5 - she’s been good in the Cayenne

Ian, an insurance policy is based on the info declared at the time it is taken out. Whatever Admiral might say, they can’t change anything or cancel cover for things that happen after that date. So I’ll not be informing them until renewal.

[Rich B]

Ian, an insurance policy is based on the info declared at the time it is taken out. Whatever Admiral might say, they can’t change anything or cancel cover for things that happen after that date. So I’ll not be informing them until renewal.

Did this come from the lawyer?

[Jobbo]

Ian, an insurance policy is based on the info declared at the time it is taken out. Whatever Admiral might say, they can’t change anything or cancel cover for things that happen after that date. So I’ll not be informing them until renewal.

Did this come from the lawyer?

Yes, me. It's not advice to you though

ETA: Admiral's own website says this: https://www.admiral.com/magazine/guides ... my-insurer
"If you or any named driver get a fixed penalty or motoring conviction during your policy term, you must tell your insurer at renewal.
However, if you're banned from driving for any reason, you must tell your insurer immediately as they may need to cancel your insurance. If you don't tell your insurer, your insurance may be invalid and any claims on your policy may be rejected."

I'm not sure they can cancel your insurance if you're banned to be honest - I'm a named driver and the car still needs fire and theft cover as well as continuous insurance, so I'd have a fight with them if there had been a ban.

[GG.]

Ian, an insurance policy is based on the info declared at the time it is taken out. Whatever Admiral might say, they can’t change anything or cancel cover for things that happen after that date. So I’ll not be informing them until renewal.

Did this come from the lawyer?

Yes, me. It's not advice to you though

ETA: Admiral's own website says this: https://www.admiral.com/magazine/guides ... my-insurer
"If you or any named driver get a fixed penalty or motoring conviction during your policy term, you must tell your insurer at renewal.
However, if you're banned from driving for any reason, you must tell your insurer immediately as they may need to cancel your insurance. If you don't tell your insurer, your insurance may be invalid and any claims on your policy may be rejected."

I'm not sure they can cancel your insurance if you're banned to be honest - I'm a named driver and the car still needs fire and theft cover as well as continuous insurance, so I'd have a fight with them if there had been a ban.

Thankfully sounds like you can avoid finding out. I suppose they may argue some force majeure type principle that they cannot insure the main driver as to do so would be insuring an illegal act. You would then have to argue that that bit of the contract is severable from the other bits insuring named drivers and for cover at home, etc. Expect they'd probably let you assign the contract to you as primary insured to avoid an argument. The ombudsman would be an alternative route but expect it would always be easier just to take out new insurance in your name.

[GG.]

Also know a chap who crashed his gf’s car, had undeclared driving convictions (think the policy had renewed and they’d forgotten to amend it) and the insurance company eventually agreed to a policy payout minus the difference in premiums she should have paid with his driving convictions… but it wasn’t a smooth process and sounds like the sort of thing to avoid.

Not sure when this happened but this sort of thing is now covered by legislation called CIDRA. I've not read into it to the level of depth as to know whether it puts an onus on an insurer to continue cover where the previously would have declined a payout, however, it does allow them to effectively re-write the contract retrospectively to the terms they would have offered if you'd properly disclosed information (but still could void if they would not have insured you at all if you had told them).