Just picked up on the news that the law on car insurance is to change, in that all vehicles not declared SORN must now be insured.

Probably might effect fellow Monster owners who have classics etc.

My link

TP

Can't see when this is to happen. My Polo is off the road but taxed, am selling at the moment. bu66er.

Mike

Can't see when this is to happen. My Polo is off the road but taxed, am selling at the moment. bu66er.

Mike

According to my reading it is the law now. There will be a softly softly run in before any potential draconian enforcement - ie warning letters will be sent to apparent offenders rather than penalty notices.

There was a long thread about this in the general section earlier, and basically it is no different to what has been for the last couple of years other than it is now being pursued more.

If you own a car and it's on the road = tax and insurance.

If it's off the road = SORN

If no SORN = insurance.

Simple!!

Edited 20 February, 201115 yr by Llanigraham

Warning letter will go out with renewal notices, but the plan is to indroduce automatic fines - just like and probably by the DVLA.

Meant to catch all the uninsured drivers, problem is they were never insured in the first place (or taxed)

In my early(er) years we used to call it 'The Road Fund Licence' and it was supposed to be 'for the upkeep of our roads' - easy, change the name to 'Car Tax' and stop road repairs !!

so basically, its a way of forcing people to SORN thier cars while off road, guess it makes the police job easier when looking for proper insurance evaders

In my early(er) years we used to call it 'The Road Fund Licence' and it was supposed to be 'for the upkeep of our roads' - easy, change the name to 'Car Tax' and stop road repairs !!

The official name is "Vehicle Excise Duty" and it seems to date from 1888. "Car Tax" is a simplified form of that term.

Neither term implies that the monies raised are dedicated to road construction and maintenance - it's just a tax, which happens to be levied on the use of certain vehicles on public roads. Between 1910 and 1937 the income from vehicle excise duties was hypothecated to the Road Fund but since 1937 the money has gone directly to the Exchequer as general taxation income. The Road Fund itself was not finally abolished until 1955 but since 1937 it had been funded by grants from the Government rather than directly from VED.

So it's not been a "Road Tax" or "Road Fund Licence", in the sense of a tax with the specific purpose of generating finance for road contruction and repairs, since 1937.

Source

The official name is "Vehicle Excise Duty" and it seems to date from 1888. "Car Tax" is a simplified form of that term.

Neither term implies that the monies raised are dedicated to road construction and maintenance - it's just a tax, which happens to be levied on the use of certain vehicles on public roads. Between 1910 and 1937 the income from vehicle excise duties was hypothecated to the Road Fund but since 1937 the money has gone directly to the Exchequer as general taxation income. The Road Fund itself was not finally abolished until 1955 but since 1937 it had been funded by grants from the Government rather than directly from VED.

So it's not been a "Road Tax" or "Road Fund Licence", in the sense of a tax with the specific purpose of generating finance for road contruction and repairs, since 1937.

Source

The whole area of tax and insurance is one that could do with a rethink. If road tax were allocated to fuel as an additional surcharge, that would meet the objection to the current system that those who use the roads most (and therefore put more wear and tear on them) pay only the same as those who seldom drive (although my neighbours out here in the sticks would argue that there might need to be some compensatory factor for those who cannot easily use public transport). As to insurance, I have never understood why we don't move to the system used in France (and elsewhere, for all I know) that a current insurance disc has to be displayed on the car windscreen. I know this doesn't cut out all avoidance/sharp practice, but it would be a start. Uninsured drivers are, to my mind, amomngst the most despicable of the criminal classes.

This is an excellant idea as you actually only need an insurance policy valid on the day the tax begins to get a tax disc, so only 1 or 2 chances a year to detect uninsured cars via that route. There must be loads of people tempted to put off renewal until the tax is due again, pretending the car was parked off the road but taxed in the meantime.

This will catch even those vehicles with a short gap between insurances unless they formally declare them off the road prior to the insurance running out.

This is an excellant idea as you actually only need an insurance policy valid on the day the tax begins to get a tax disc, so only 1 or 2 chances a year to detect uninsured cars via that route. There must be loads of people tempted to put off renewal until the tax is due again, pretending the car was parked off the road but taxed in the meantime.

This will catch even those vehicles with a short gap between insurances unless they formally declare them off the road prior to the insurance running out.

There is now something called 'The Motorists Insurance Database' (MID) which does exactly what it's name implies, i.e. keeps a record of all vehicles insurance details. If you cancel or lapse your policy the insurance company concerned will notify the MID immeadiatly - just as they have to do within 6 days of you taking out the policy.

I suspect that there will be an area of cooperation between the MID and the DVLA.....

There is now something called 'The Motorists Insurance Database' (MID) which does exactly what it's name implies, i.e. keeps a record of all vehicles insurance details. If you cancel or lapse your policy the insurance company concerned will notify the MID immeadiatly - just as they have to do within 6 days of you taking out the policy.

I suspect that there will be an area of cooperation between the MID and the DVLA.....

Isnt that where the police get all thier information from aswell

Re the above posts (#10 and #11) - that's fine in theory but why then are there apparently still so many uninsured drivers on the road? The insurance disc on the windscreen while (as I say) not foolproof, does at least provide a quick, immediate, physical check.

Re the above posts (#10 and #11) - that's fine in theory but why then are there apparently still so many uninsured drivers on the road? The insurance disc on the windscreen while (as I say) not foolproof, does at least provide a quick, immediate, physical check.

Photoshop or similar, it is relatively easy to create an imitation which will look good from the distance.

I am sure there must be stolen blanks arounds as well, similar to the 1000's of blank MOT's that are available.

At least now the tax and mot details are input directly into the database, you can tax a car on line the same day an MOT has been carried out!

I suspect most totally uninsured cars are kept off the road, and unless they pass a police car or roadside tax disc checker they were unlikely to get caught. Cars bought cheep and left uninsured are unlikley to be registered by the new owner, who will have given false details to the seller, so will not be traced by the DVLC.

The main source now of uninsured drivers are those driving cars which do actually have insurance, but in some one elses name, eg partner, as they can't get insurance themselves as banned, not passed test etc. These will not be caught on the road unless pulled by the police for an offence, or on suspicion, eg young lad in car insured to older person.

Edited 21 February, 201115 yr by kenfowler3966

One thing has puzzled me for a while regarding insurance.....over here in Ireland we have to have a certifiacte that goes in the car window that looks like a tax disk but has all your insurabce info on it....why doesnt the UK have it? Ireland normally lags behind the UK in this kinda thing!!

K:)

One thing has puzzled me for a while regarding insurance.....over here in Ireland we have to have a certifiacte that goes in the car window that looks like a tax disk but has all your insurabce info on it....why doesnt the UK have it? Ireland normally lags behind the UK in this kinda thing!!

K:)

No idea, but I think it would be a very good idea in some ways.

Only think is that you'd have to have some information missing from that, as otherwise you'd end up with unattended fraud IMHO.

Something like getting people hitting parked cars, taking the details and claiming they were hit while parked etc. Sad as it is, I wouldnt' be surprised to see it if the insurance details were on show to all.

kit,

that has been suggested, but some of the companies complained it would be too expensive!!

Something that has altered with these newer Rules is that it is now even easier for the Police to remove the vehicle from the miscrenants.

One thing has puzzled me for a while regarding insurance.....over here in Ireland we have to have a certifiacte that goes in the car window that looks like a tax disk but has all your insurabce info on it....why doesnt the UK have it? Ireland normally lags behind the UK in this kinda thing!!K:)

I agree with you on this one Kit, but in the UK you have to have insurance to get a tax disc. With the wider use of the ANPR cameras the police soon pick up on whether the car is taxed and insured. Some drivers buy their insurance online on monthly payments, once they get the certificate they stop the monthly payments, but still have the certificate.

In Ireland are still allowed to drive home from your driving test on your own even if you failed the test?

Maybe the monthly insurance policies should do what TVL do, which is double payments for 6 months, then keep you 6 months in advance on payments.

Issue a 6 months insurance disk and job done.

Obviously you have refund issues, but less people taking the certificate then cancelling.

Hmm, interesting one. So if I want to have a car sat on my private driveway at home, which still has tax on it, I have to have it insured?

Doesn't really matter to me as I have trade insurance, but seems a bit unfair if logical.

There is one way it'd get sorted out for good, and that is to make VED a lot more expensive and include third party cover as part of it. I believe that's the Australian (and possibly NZ - Rob C?) way?

I dont see what the problem is? If you are gonna use the vehicle it needs to be insured. If your not then why would you have it taxed? Get a refund and SORN, money is better in your pocket than the Goverments.

I dont see what the problem is? If you are gonna use the vehicle it needs to be insured. If your not then why would you have it taxed? Get a refund and SORN, money is better in your pocket than the Goverments.

The biggest problem is when you are selling a car privately, like I did a few years ago.

You have bought a new car, and transfered the current policy over to that. My old car then sat on my driveway, taxed and waiting for a buyer. Yes it was uninsured, but was not on the hightway and therefore on private land. If you now have to declare it sorn, then it would mean that anyone buying the car will have to insure and tax it before they were allowed to drive it away which can take days to sort out, and no test drives either. whereas under the previous system it would only need insurance as the tax would still have been valid. In this case, should you need to drive it then you could have got a days insurance if needed.