On the radio news this morning I heard that something like 1 in 20 cars on the road is uninsured generally and this goes up to 1 in 5 of the cars owned by people in the 17 to 21 age group.
The youngsters (bless 'em) apparently say that insurance is too expensive or they were unaware that they required it.
I think the second excuse is just that - an excuse, and I don't believe it for a second. We all know insurance is expensive but if you can't afford it you can't have a car, can you? Tough.
But where's the ANPR system then? You can't go on the road without being tracked by cameras and police forces like to hold onto the data. But what are they doing with it? Why can't it be used to take uninsured people off the road?
If you put this together with the suggestion the other day that 1 crime is solved for every 1000 CCTV cameras, you come to the conclusion that the sacrifice of our privacy to all sorts of snooping cameras isn't worth the benefit in the maintenance of the law.
|
If 1 in 20 cars on the road is uninsured is to be believed (and not political hype) then crime really does pay.
these 1 in 20 drivers must be good drivers (i.e. not speeding or driving to draw attention to themselves) to not get pulled.
But I thought what with so many ANPR systems there wouldn't be so many uninsured drivers as they would quickly get removed.
Maybe that's the plan with these delightful young drivers .... too many to stop
|
I think that you will find the problem isn't with the detection, its having the actual manpower to stop each suspect vehicle and check it out. As far as I am aware most police forces have purges on doing dedicated ANPR/stop check work, but obviously they have many other crimes to concentrate on too and in the grand scheme of things ANPR detections are very low priority.
Don't forget too that the ANPR system is only as good as the databases it relies upon. You are assuming that every element of data is 100% accurate - it isn't. Add to this that the database can only tell you certain details about the car - the registered keeper & his/her driving licence entitlements, the insurance status, the MOT status and whether it has tax or not. What it can't tell you is who is actually driving the car, what insurance cover they may be driving it on (their own policy, a motor traders policy etc), the information that the ANPR system is telling you may be a long way off the actual reality.
|
theres also plenty of cars on false plates
spoken to a man only this morning who had his number plates stolen last night
we need bobbies in cars
the roads around me are racetracks on a night usually after midnight
|
|
|
I recently saw a VOSA/Police ANPR sitting in a layby - there were at least 6 x Police & 6 x VOSA about at the time -
However it looked like they were doing a "good trade" as they had HGVs, Transit type vans & private cars in the nearby catchment - probably about 20 in total.
About 1 hour later they had almost all gone, apart from 1 or 2 "yellow jackets", there were still maybe 15 drivers hanging around their cars, vans etc
|
|
I think that there is a misconception - what's being reported is that young drivers are insured on mummy and daddy's policy despite being the main drivers - what's commonly known as "fronting". Police in a local town have cottened on to this and are taking boy racers off the road.
|
When does it get to the point of honest drivers saying 'stuff it' and not bothering with registration and insurance?
I believe I could find an identical car to mine, in a different part of the country, on any of the webcam sites. It would be quite simple to check if it's taxed and insured. I could easily clone the number plates.
What chance would there then be of me being caught (and avoiding my recent fine in Brixton high street)?
Bitter and twisted, moi? My first penalty in thirty-odd years.
|
|
|
I think that there is a misconception - what's being reported is that young drivers are insured on mummy and daddy's policy ... >>
No misconception, if I read the "exclusive" report correctly:
news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/the_p_word/newsid_10000...m
"Hundreds of thousands of young motorists are driving on the roads illegally because they do not have any insurance. "
Edited by jbif on 26/08/2009 at 12:42
|
|
|
|
|
the trouble is, when/if they get caught the fine is a lot less than the insurance most would of have to have paid. so where is the deterrent. the fine should match the cost of insurance plus the fine for the offence. also they should have to prove they have had insurance for the preceeding years they have had the car if not lump that on aswell. if they cannot pay take the car off them and sell it on and a 1 year ban to go with it, minimum. same with car tax. make it a deterrent.
|
|
£200.00 fixed penalty and 6 points, car can be seized as well. How costly do you want to make it ?
|
|
if to insure their car would have cost them £2000, £200 is a joke
|
if to insure their car would have cost them £2000, £200 is a joke >>
Fines and points are no deterrent to many of these law breakers. If you fine them, they don't pay the fine either. If you take their car off them, they find some means of getting another one. Remember that their source of income is not necessarily from a hard day's honest graft.
The only way I can think of to make sure a car on the road has paid at least a little towards third party risks is to levy a charge via fuel duties that goes to the MIB to cover their costs for uninsured driver claims. At least that means that the contribution paid depends on the fuel consumed, hence being somewhat proportional to the power/weight of the car and the time spent on the road.
|
|
|
|
£200.00 fixed penalty and 6 points...
The slightly bonkers thing is that once they been caught and got a no insurance endorsement then if they wanted to get insurance the premium will be way higher.
|
Remember when you pass your test 6 points in the first two years and you're banned. I think insurance companies need to be a lot stricter on these things. They are happy to take their money knowing its probably fronting but then refuse to pay out. They should have refused insurance in the first place.
As for driving with no insurance etc people do get stopped, my neighbour used to it and the police were round his house nearly every day. He had no licence, no insurance etc. He's stopped doing it now.
I asked him why he hadn't taken his test
"driving is easy mate, I need no test to be able to drive init"
I replied if its so easy you will have no problem passing and it will keep the police of your back :).
|
I think that you will find the problem isn't with the detection, its having the actual manpower to stop each suspect vehicle and check it out. >>
There may be some truth in this, but that's for ACPO to resolve. I won't go on about more front-line policing and less time spent on ensuring that the force reflects the diversity of the community it serves, but I do wonder sometimes where the police actually are. I drove 300 miles the other day and saw two police cars.
If the policy is to police by electronics as in ANPR, then you have to act on the info or you're just playing games and insulting the law-abiding majority by effectively allowing the law-breaking minority to wave two fingers at the law.
|
Optomist if it is policing by electronics, why does it need to be a highly paid policeman who has to deal with it?
DVLA can patrol streets , check for out of date tax and clamp these and eventually lift them away so why not something similar for ANPR?
|
DVLA can patrol streets...
They outsource this to NCP. I have no problem if this does not involve police officers who are better used elsewhere.
|
|
So why can we not get round this insurance issue for youngsters?
How about a scheme like Motability for young drivers.
Govt buys / leases a full fleet of something small and unpowerful, a Toyota Aygo for argument's sake. Once you pass the test you can lease this for £x per month fully inclusive of insurance.
They could be speed restricted if deemed appropriate and maybe other exclusions put in force eg number of passengers allowed. An incentive to go down this road (other than the obvious) might be enhanced no claims or something similar. Built into the cost could be Pass Plus or something similar.
OK it will not stop all the Corsa chavs but to the fair minded and law abiding youngsters, it can get them mobile, get them legal and get them experience.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
But where's the ANPR system then?
If the car has insurance for another driver then ANPR will not flag the car.
After getting points for driving with no insurance, many insurance companies won't insure you at all for a long time.
|
They outsource this to NCP. I have no problem if this does not involve police officers who are better used elsewhere. >>
I was going to post that lifting the cars could be done by PCSO's or some other support but thought that might not be legal. If it's ok, the evidence of the uninsured car could just go to the area where it's registered and an agent of the police could go round with a truck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
