Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/new...news=1&bbcws=1

:shocked:

Re: [B]Best steer clear of Bradford then.....[/B]
 

wow 57% that alarming ,wonder why its so high in Bradford[my boss lives there ill check him out]and the chap at the end didnt have a licence.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

This is becoming a big problem all over the country. I normally check the "Before the Bench" section of my local free paper, and about 40/50% of offences that are in there are due to driving without insurance/licence/tax/mot.

Shocking! But if you do the math, the fine for driving without insurance is usually cheaper than buying the insurance. That doesn't make it ok, but it will give people the insentive to do it if they're going to save money. Unfortunately, it doesn't save lives. :(

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

Bad BBC reporting again - the report (which is perfectly fine) says the 57% figure applies to 'some districts of Bradford' but the headline says 'most drivers uninsured', which is a different and unsupported claim.

Still, it's a valid use of numberplate recognition in my book, and should actually work as a deterrent. Driving around with a numberplate is part of the deal of being allowed on the road, and the point of the numberplate is to link the car with the person driving it. No civil liberties problem there.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

It'll be because the majority of the population originated from countries where driving is just something you do - no laws, regulation, or safety.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

What - the USA?

btw, from the article
"The Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB) said the BD3 postcode area had 4,403 uninsured vehicles, which equates to 57.3% of all vehicles in that area" (BD8 wasn't much better, tbf)

That, imho, is like saying because Haringey has 8 times more burglaries than the national average, London has 8 x the burglaries.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

perhaps if more recognition technology was employed, and more vehicles removed from the roads we legal drivers could ,actualy get somewhere without sitting in jams for hours ,and allso the government could get rid of tolls and congestion charges.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

No chance. And how do you think the Mp's, councillors and family workers are going to pay for their massive pay rises this year ?.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

its the high cost of insurance that just feeds more high cost, i also believe there are a lot of uninsured drivers amognst the luxury car market, some costing £20,000+ a year to insure. lets hope if the police are successful then car insurance should start to come down in price??

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/new...248174&bbcws=1

Problem is some of these drivers have decided to use foreign plates to avoid detection :mad:

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

yes that also is true!:(

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

Not sure what the legal situation is but maybe it should be illegal to drive around in a foreign registered car without verifiable proof of insurance.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

It's not illegal to have no insurance as long as you can prove you have the means to pay if you cause damage, injury or death. The Police, fire brigade and ambulance service don't have insurance for their vehicles, they have a pot of about £500million, this is to cover them in case they have an accident or cause and accident, my landlord was on about the same thing the other week, he's in the Police force doing what they were doing in the video clip, he went onto talk about the technology they have in their cars, he said as soon as the ANPR kicks in with a alert within a split second he's got all the information on the car, the owner, a picture of the owner, the owners past, if the car has an MOT, tax etc etc.

He added there's no getting away now with the technology thats available to the Police.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

:confused: So the people in the clip are being prosecuted for not having the money to pay for accidents they haven't caused yet? Or am I missing something (that's not impossible btw :) )

Re getting away with it - the system isn't foolproof -surely if someones using cloned plates for example the ANPR system won't register a lack of insurance unless the 'donor' vehicle isn't isnured either.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

Don't know how it works mate but if you can prove you have the means to pay or have a pot where the money comes from assuming you've got to have a few million in that pot then you don't need to have motor insurance.

Like I mentioned in my post my landlord is a Police officer with Nottinghamshire Police and he's on the traffic side of the force.

---------- Post added at 15:39 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------


As for cloned plates mate I've not got a clue how it works.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

The actual offence is
Charge: Using, causing or permitting to be used a motor vehicle on a road or other public place when there is not force a policy of insurance or security against third party risks. Road Traffic Act 1988, s. 143.

Section 144 lists the exceptions
144 Exceptions from requirement of third-party insurance or security
(1) Section 143 of this Act does not apply to a vehicle owned by a person who has deposited and keeps deposited with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court the sum of £15,000, at a time when the vehicle is being driven under the owner’s control.
(2) Section 143 does not apply�
(a) to a vehicle owned�
(i) by the council of a county or county district in England and Wales, the Common Council of the City of London, the council of a London borough, the Inner London Education Authority, or a joint authority (other than a police authority) established by Part IV of the [1985 c. 51.] Local Government Act 1985,
(ii) by a regional, islands or district council in Scotland, or
(iii) by a joint board or committee in England or Wales, or joint committee in Scotland, which is so constituted as to include among its members representatives of any such council,
at a time when the vehicle is being driven under the owner’s control,
(b) to a vehicle owned by a police authority or the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police district, at a time when it is being driven under the owner’s control, or to a vehicle at a time when it is being driven for police purposes by or under the direction of a constable, or by a person employed by a police authority, or employed by the Receiver, or
(c) to a vehicle at a time when it is being driven on a journey to or from any place undertaken for salvage purposes pursuant to Part IX of the [1894 c. 60.] Merchant Shipping Act 1894,
(d) to the use of a vehicle for the purpose of its being provided in pursuance of a direction under section 166(2)(b) of the [1955 c. 18.] Army Act 1955 or under the corresponding provision of the [1955 c. 19.] Air Force Act 1955,
(e) to a vehicle which is made available by the Secretary of State to any person, body or local authority in pursuance of section 23 or 26 of the [1977 c. 49.] National Health Service Act 1977 at a time when it is being used in accordance with the terms on which it is so made available,
(f) to a vehicle which is made available by the Secretary of State to any local authority, education authority or voluntary organisation in Scotland in pursuance of section 15 or 16 of the [1978 c. 29.] National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978 at a time when it is being used in accordance with the terms on which it is so made available.

I don't think proving you can pay is in there...... ;)

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

I would suggest you need more than a few million which is why its a loop hole that cant be used by the public - As my dad always said to me about uninsured drivers... If you crashed into the Man Utd tour bus and killed a several players it would cost hundreds of millions in liability.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

So when I apply for a Tax Disc why do I have to produce proof of current insurance?:confused:

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

You don't if you apply online. Big Brother has his eye on you...

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

They deserve everything they get.
No insurance = no car, simple.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

Err yes you do..they check that you have current insurance as well as an up to date MOT certificate.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

How the hell do I know?? I was passing information on that was given to me by a serving Policeman in the Nottinghmashire force regarding the Police Fire and Ambulance not having insurance.

---------- Post added at 17:25 ---------- Previous post was at 17:24 ----------


Ermm section 1 says it all doesn't it?

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

I reckon the chances of any of these folk having deposited anything with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court are exactly ZERO!

I don't think they should be able to get their cars back under any circumstances and any money generated from the sale of confiscated vehicles should be put into the fund for the victims of uninsured drivers.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

But you said...

You don't have to produce proof of anything - they already have the details.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

:rolleyes:You knew exactly what I was saying and that is that the ordinary driver HAS to have insurance to get a tax disc whether you get it online or queue up at the post office. Stop being such a richard brain fer goodness sake.:p:


So no insurance no tax disc.Driving a vehicle without a tax disc is also an offence as it is without insurance.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

Although I'm sure with the donations you'd receive from Liverpool, Arsenal and Man City fans you'd still be in profit.

The other thing with uninsured cars is as well as the fine/points you get the car also gets nabbed and taken away so they have to pay removal/storage costs as well as providing insurance details before the car is released back to the owner.

Yup. Even having one but not displaying it is an offence as well. Ambulance, fire brigade, police cars all have to display tax discs even when the excise amount paid is nil.

Re: Best steer clear of Bradford then.....
 

One of the guys at my rifle club is a wheelchair user & he doesn't have to pay for road tax, but he has to display a valid tax disc for the year (on his car, not his wheelchair).