He didn't make the overtake !!! (1 Viewer)

[Holly's mum]

However I can’t forgive you buying another BMW ??

Sorry Richard but I love my new (to me) BMW.
Paul is still upset that I didn't want the Audi TT

 

[thebriars]

I think a sizeable fine of about a years salary. Of course that doesn't work if someone is not in work. I think we ought to have an unpaid work scheme for people like that there are a lot of verges that have plenty of litter on.

There already is such a scheme for offenders who don't go to jail. They are called Community Sentences.

 

[Silver-Fox]

I take it you have the same view with BMW bikes ?

The only good ones I’ve seen had one Micheal Dunlop astride it ?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Silver-Fox]

Sorry Richard but I love my new (to me) BMW.
Paul is still upset that I didn't want the Audi TT

No need to apologise I don’t have to live with the shame and drive it ?

Yep should have gone for the tt ??

 

[Bonkers the Dog]

This rider was not a "biker". I am a biker, like hundreds of thousands of other men and women who own bikes, ride sensibly, abide by the law and respect other road users.

This man was a thief. He took his Brother's pride and joy and wrote off two vehicles and in the process nearly killing himself and other road users. He will be charged with some or all of the following depending on the circumstances.

1/Theft, motor vehicle. Or:

2/ Taking without the owners consent ( no intent to deprive the owner of property) ie 'joyride'.

3/ Riding without insurance.

4/ Riding otherwise in accordance with the terms of a licence.

5/ Dangerous driving.

About the only thing the owner could be charged with is:

1/ Causing and permitting. ie he allowed, permitted, encouraged or facilitated his brother in riding his bike on the road in the knowledge that he would do so with out insurance or a licence.

I would doubt the Police will even bother with that line as he would have to admit it under caution. Anyway, they have enough to send the thief to prison.

As far as court leniency is concerned you are jumping the gun. It may be a year before this sees the inside of a court, if at all, and he still may be sentenced to a custodial one. You will have to wait and see.

 

[Oscar]

Sorry to hear about this - hope you're okay Holly's Mum x

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jaws]

If the brother says he let him use the bike he will be done for it, but his fully comp insurance will cover any third party claims
If permission was not given the rider will have TWOC added to his charge sheet and any out of pocket expenses can be claimed back from MIB

Out of pocket for future insurance premiums is, I am afaid, a right off. Several cases have been put forward but all failed
The ruling is always the same. The judge cannot be expected to know how much extra it will cost
BUT..
You can ask leave of the court to return with a further claim once the extra cost is known and is in writing
This has been done several times, and depending on the courts disposition at the time may or may not be granted

Apart from all that squit, really glad that Yvette walked away basically unharmed

( Sorry Bonkers the Dog , we must have been typing at the same time ! )

 

[Roedi]

I thought there was a fund that insurers pay into to cover for uninsured drivers? We were hit by one a few years ago and as well as keeping our no claims bonus we also had our excess refunded, this was not part of our policy. Do check with Aviva that you are covered under this scheme... https://www.gov.uk/compensation-victim-uninsured-driver

PS. Glad no one was seriously hurt and only metal/pride damaged.

The MIB is designed for individuals who are injured or suffered property damage. It is s funded by all policyholders and is around 5% of the premiums charged in all motor vehicle insurance. Claims are paid by insurers out of policyholders premiums so in effect our money.
The MIB It is a long winded organisation in that it takes a long time to try and sort anything.
If the lad has car insurance then that policy may cover him to drive a motorcycle on a third party only basis.
Comprehensive cover is really accidental damage to your own vehicle.
If he has a job you can go to County Court and ask for an attachment of earnings order if he cannot pay.
May I suggest you ask Aviva to try and recover their losses and attach you excess on the end of their claim. Aviva will be able to find out things about the third party which you may well struggle to do so.
The third party will find his life gets a lot more difficult if he gets a CCJ.
Good luck and hope it works out for you.
Thanks for the person who corrected me. When I did claims it was injury only. Must get up to date.

 

[Next Stop]

The MIB is designed for individuals who are injured. Not property damage.
It is funded by all policyholders and is around 5% of the premiums charged in all motor vehicle insurance. Claims are paid by insurers out of policyholders premiums so in effect our money.
The MIB It is a long winded organisation in that it takes a long time to try and sort anything.
If the lad has car insurance then that policy may cover him to drive a motorcycle on a third party only basis.
Comprehensive cover is really accidental damage to your own vehicle.
If he has a job you can go to County Court and ask for an attachment of earnings order if he cannot pay.
May I suggest you ask Aviva to try and recover their losses and attach you excess on the end of their claim. Aviva will be able to find out things about the third party which you may well struggle to do so.
The third party will find his life gets a lot more difficult if he gets a CCJ.
Good luck and hope it works out for you.

We had no trouble in claiming back our insurance excess through the MIB earlier this year when a drunk, foreign, uninsured, band driver wiped out our car outside our house late one night.
Well worth the filling out paperwork.
Glad you are both ok!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Puddleduck]

I am really glad you were not hurt physically. The shock sometimes comes along much later though.

If the bike owner allowed the driver to use the bike he may also be legally responsible. Find a good solicitor.

Put it all in the hands of a solicitor and then try to forget about it - treat the claim as if it was happening to someone else. When my car was written off my insurance company sorted out my claims solicitor for me as I had legal protection as an add on. It took 4 or 5 years to get the full payment but was worth it - enough to pay for the last motorhome . I'd still rather not have had the injuries though.

Living in the sticks is not an excuse for not buying something electric
But I'll let you off this time

We have looked at EVs but I wonder just how practical they would be for us at the moment. Yes, we would leave here with a full charge (assuming the power had not gone off during the night of course) but would we be able to get to my parents and back on a single charge? Especially in an emergency situation when we needed to get to and from the hospital which is further on yet. It's over 220 miles return trip (direct from us to parents, or almost 260 to the hospital via my parents, no EV charger at the hospital, I checked last time), mountainous terrain with lights and heater needed this time of year. Nowhere to recharge at my parents I'm afraid (unless the cable went across a footpath and a road) and recharge points on the route few and far between even when they are working and available. At least with scoot juice I can carry a spare can if I think it necessary.

A couple of years ago our regional tv people had a commercially available top range EV that they tried out for a week and although quoted at over 300 miles between charges they didn't get half that. Not only did they get "Range Anxiety" but also had problems finding the charging points they had been told were available and several they did find were out of use.

 

[jezport]

If you have legal protection get them to act.

 

[hblewett]

Very irritating and an offence that l believe is taken too lightly by Magistrates as people on the receiving end can be wildly out of pocket because of the actions of scroats.

Don't blame the Magistrates, blame the Department of Justice - they issue guidelines to the Court on the range of sentences allowed to be applied for each offence. My OH was a Magistrate for 20 years and was very frustrated by these guidelines in a lot of cases. And in every case where a custodial sentence is applied, even if they gave them the maximum they knew they would only serve half if they behaved themselves when they were behind bars.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Otter Spotter]

If he is uninsured you should be able to put a claim into the MIB (Motor Insurers Bureau). If the bike was insured by someone i.e. the brother you may have more joy. Very irritating and an offence that l believe is taken too lightly by Magistrates as people on the receiving end can be wildly out of pocket because of the actions of scroats.

Sorry but if the rider does not have a valid license then he and the bike are not insured on the road, unless his brother states he did not give him permission to use then he the owner and Yvette can claim off his insurance and rider should be charged with Twoc . Taking without consent which is a criminal offence not a motoring offence. Either way the rider needs his legs tying together then arse kicked down the road.

 

[Roger20]

I had a car written off by an uninsured driver where the car was taken/stolen from a "mate". I thought MIB would be involved but because the car was insured by the "mate" it was dealt with between insurance companies and I was not left out of pocket in the end.

 

[Guigsy]

When I lived in a flat, I went down to the building's car park one day and found my car had been shunted. And it'd been hit hard enough to squash my motorbike that was parked against the wall behind it. Car had about £2k of damage and the bike was a £8k write-off. From the building's CCTV, we managed to get some ropey footage of a pair of people that looked drunk mashing their car into mine. We passed the footage on to the Police.

After about a year, the driver and the owner were taken to court and were prosecuted. My legal cover meant my insurance companies (bike and car!) claimed the money back off them and I got excess back and the insurance company recovered their costs.

However, even though I was found not to be at fault and everything on my side was recovered, it of course still affected my insurance for all my vehicles for the next 5 years. And because it was two claims (bike and car, but for the same incident!) my insurance was nasty for a while.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Chris-n-Leeka]

I think it would be a load of hassle and upset that we don't need at present plus how would be know the future cost we will incur to claim for.

Its a very easy process and hassle free. I recently won a case over a cowboy electrician - all costs are automatically passed onto the guilty party so the 'victim' is never out of pocket.

MCOL - Money Claim Online - Welcome

www.moneyclaim.gov.uk

 

[The Wino]

There already is such a scheme for offenders who don't go to jail. They are called Community Sentences.

I'm not sure fines are on those scales or the amount of time on the orders

 

[knokinonabit]

I can foresee a time in the future where each car has a license reader and finger print sensor instead of a key. You scan your driving license (which has a biometric data chip) and then put your finger on the touch plate to start. Suspended licenses won't start a car and using someone elses won't work due to the finger print. I suppose you could also implement MOT checks and insurance checks.

You could also authorise only certain drivers which would cut down on theft, unlawful use and car jacking.

It wouldn't be expensive to do and may be a long term solution, especially with the changes to EV's and always connected cars coming down the line.

A technical solution to this backed by extremely tough laws and penalties may in the medium term cut insurance costs and accidents like this.

I think that is basically a good idea, but it has some drawbacks.
If the vehicle goes to a garage for servicing how do the multiple mechanics etc drive it if they can't start it ? There would have to be some kind of override built in to facilitate this, and as we all know, if a human built it to make it secure another human will find the means to take it.
I use the term human loosely in the second part of the last sentence.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[nobby]

I can foresee a time in the future where each car has a license reader and finger print sensor instead of a key. You scan your driving license (which has a biometric data chip) and then put your finger on the touch plate to start. Suspended licenses won't start a car and using someone elses won't work due to the finger print. I suppose you could also implement MOT checks and insurance checks.

You could also authorise only certain drivers which would cut down on theft, unlawful use and car jacking.

It wouldn't be expensive to do and may be a long term solution, especially with the changes to EV's and always connected cars coming down the line.

A technical solution to this backed by extremely tough laws and penalties may in the medium term cut insurance costs and accidents like this.

Only problem with this is car thieves will start cutting your fingers off