Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

What can I get for my money? :/ watch

Announcements
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sexyguy)
    Your wrong. Insurance companies may refuse to pay, but people vary rarely are prosecuted for it. Because you have to prove it within all reasonable doubt. This means you have to have followed the car all year (never) or the person has to admit it (only if they are retarded). Indeed it should be the person who is going to court, they will win and the insurers will have to pay out!

    Im not wrong in the slightest. Even if you dont get prosecuted but the insurance company refuses to pay out your left with a bill for whatever you hit. If you want to run that risk, fine. The other party can still bring a civil case and make you pay out for years if you dont have the money at the time.

    And they dont have to follow the car at all, they have to prove to a judge. So that could be by looking at bank statements, if you buy fuel every week its a fair assumption your using it. If you buy fuel at stations near uni, chances are its not your rents driving. They ask neighbours, they look through speed camera tickets if you've had any. There are plenty of ways without following the car for a year...... Any way they can prove the whereabouts of the car at a given point can be used to form a picture or patten of use.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Riderz)
    And they dont have to follow the car at all, they have to prove to a judge. So that could be by looking at bank statements, if you buy fuel every week its a fair assumption your using it. If you buy fuel at stations near uni, chances are its not your rents driving. They ask neighbours, they look through speed camera tickets if you've had any. There are plenty of ways without following the car for a year...... Any way they can prove the whereabouts of the car at a given point can be used to form a picture or patten of use.
    1) It will almost never go to court, certainly not if you do not admit the offence.

    2) You do not have to be using that fuel to run a specific car, you could have a generator. Or you could just be topping up your mates as he gives you lifts all over.

    3) They wouldnt get to see your bank records unless you went to court, so they wouldnt be able to use that as grounds.

    4) If you got lot's of speeding tickets it could just mean you are a fast driver, it does not prove you are the primary driver.

    5) They have to prove you are the primary driver, none of what you suggest does this.

    If you can provide me ONE link to anyone having any of your "arguments" used against them in court I will eat my words. However I am going to hypothesise that you are just the type of person who feels "a rule is a rule" and who will argue until you are blue in the face that you are right.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sexyguy)
    1) It will almost never go to court, certainly not if you do not admit the offence.

    2) You do not have to be using that fuel to run a specific car, you could have a generator. Or you could just be topping up your mates as he gives you lifts all over.

    3) They wouldnt get to see your bank records unless you went to court, so they wouldnt be able to use that as grounds.

    4) If you got lot's of speeding tickets it could just mean you are a fast driver, it does not prove you are the primary driver.

    5) They have to prove you are the primary driver, none of what you suggest does this.

    If you can provide me ONE link to anyone having any of your "arguments" used against them in court I will eat my words. However I am going to hypothesise that you are just the type of person who feels "a rule is a rule" and who will argue until you are blue in the face that you are right.
    Your wrong, actually. YOU have to prove that your not fronting.

    Let me quote this, posted on another forum, by a barrister, even if you wont believe me you might believe him.

    As for "a rule is a rule", not at all. BUT when it directly affects me, and my premiums, as well as potentially affecting anyone who does it, then I think im quite entitled to not encourage fraud!! Insurance fraud adds about 10% to my premium this year......


    Its either 6 or 8 points for no insurance. Its not an instant ban , its licence revoked and back to learner status. So have to take tests again.

    Once you have a record of lying to insurers it becomes very difficult to get anybody to give you cover at any price. Increasingly insurance companies are informing the police when they have been lied to, resulting in criminal charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception. A conviction for an offence of dishonesty can really screw up your chances of getting a job.


    You clearly don't understand the situation. If an insurance company has a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, in other words that they have been lied to in an attempt to obtain cheap insurance, they simply void the insurance. Its then up to the insured person to challenge that in court as a defence to the charge of driving without insurance or obtaining financial advantage by deception. Or both.

    Often the car is actually registered to the young driver which makes the fraud easy to prove. If its registered to the parent and insurance cover is voided due to fronting, that makes the parent liable to a charge of permitting use of a car by an uninsured person. That gets the parent 6 points.

    If it gets to court, the young driver has to get the parent to state, on oath, that they own the car and are the main driver. When they have stated that, they get cross examined about actual journeys, asked to provide proof of the last time they filled the car with petrol and lots of other things. Its very easy for an experienced prosecutor to expose a liar in cases like this.

    Then the prosecutor breaks the news that the parent may be prosecuted for attempting to pervert the course of justice. With the near certainty of a custodial sentence.

    insurance contracts come under civil law not criminal law. Failure to have insurance when driving or lying to them in order to get cheaper insurance are criminal offences.

    Insurance contracts come under a rule called "utmost good faith" which means you must tell them the truth, answer all questions they ask and inform them of any changes in your circumstances. If they have reasonable cause to believe that you have lied to them they can void the contract.


    Driving without insurance is what is called a "reverse burden of proof" offence. The prosecution must prove that you were using or keeping a car in circumstances which require insurance and that you failed to produce a valid certificate. It is then down to you to prove that you were covered.

    I have posted some comments about this on a magistrates forum just to let colleagues know about the level of interest this thread has produced. I didn't mention this forum by name or which make of car. There has been a lot of interest in the fact that at least one person is so unaware of the possible consequences that he admitted fronting in such clear terms. The were even more surprised that anybody should put forward the suggestion that everybody does it and suggest that you are unlikely to get caught.

    One of my colleagues told us of a case she has dealt with recently. A young male was stopped for minor speeding. Everything checked out but police were suspicious about a young driver with insurance on a performance car. Insurance were phoned and told police he was a named driver with his mother as main driver. Police asked for further checks which showed mother to be main driver on three cars. Insurance told police they believed this was fronting and voided cover. Car was seized.

    turns out mother was fronting for both sons. Both sons now have 6 points for no insurance. mother and both sons are facing trial at crown court for conspiracy to defraud under section 3 of the Fraud Act 2006. Its at crown court because its too serious for magistrates to deal with. All three face jail if convicted.
    Look through these as well if your bored.

    http://uk.insurancewide.com/insuranc...aims-20000171/

    http://uk.insurancewide.com/insuranc...rise-20000301/

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ox/7052569.stm

    http://www.easier.com/15609-parents-...nce-fraud.html

    http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/t...0&nmt=Fronting
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    I think its more down to the insurance company... for example if you own the car yet have daddy insure it with a named driver, then if there is an accident the insurance can check the v5, if your name is on it not daddys, no payment.

    Its not worth the hassle.. i have a friend that lost his license and car because of this.. as the car was technically not insured so the police impounded it, then crushed it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i got my ford focus 1.8 tdci 2002 with about 60k miles for around 3k....but its risky coz it was from this independent dealer who was clearly quite dodgy.

    Its a great car tho for my first one
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    If you want a cheap(ish) premium at 17:

    1) Put your parents on as named drivers - this is allowed I think, unlike fronting, and can lower your premiums by a lot.

    2) Buy a one litre car - sucks I know, but you'll get much lower premiums.

    3) Shop around individual insurers, not just comparethemarket.com etc.

    Best thing to do is wait though really. The older the cheaper.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: February 3, 2010
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.