Vehicles kept off road require insurance

[SilverSolder]

Seeing that this is an area that is NOT regulated by the EU (an insurance when on the road is mandatory, of course), but by the individual member states, each having

It is a ruling by Court of Justice of the EU?

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&td=ALL&num=C-80/17

The directives are quoted above.

Keep in mind that any EU car/driver has the right to drive in any EU country with no problems -  this requires some ground rules that member nations are free to implement in the best way for them. 

The common rules (directives) say that (1) every member nation has to make sure every car and driver is insured, and (2) they must set up a fund that covers the damage/medical costs where the driver has no insurance.   This way, every European can be confident that everone driving on European roads are covered in case of an accident.  Only an idiot would be against these two agreed principles, but there are of course plenty of ISO-9000 certified idiots to go around...

Moving on to the specific case:   A Portuguese lady owns a car (registered and with plates) but did not have insurance, claiming essentially "Nobody was using it, honest" -  until her kid, sadly, crashed it and killed several people.   As a result, the Portuguese "fund of last resort" had to cough up for the costs, in accordance with Portuguese law and agreements with the other European countries.

Later on, this fund then went after the lady for the money, saying she should have had insurance since she had not handed in the plates.  They won the case in the first court, then they lost the case in the Portuguese appeal court, which held that the lady was not driving at the time of the accident and therefore was not liable. 

The fund disagreed and appealed to the Portuguese Supreme Court which found that the question just boils down to this:  Does the mere fact of owning a registered car (rather than actually using it) make insurance mandatory?   The SC escalated this question to the ECJ and the ruling (which included input from a British legal team) concluded that Yes, that's what we had all agreed - if you own a registered car, you have to have it insured.  It looks like Portugal did not have super clear or well known rules on this issue (until now).

Nothing here looks unreasonable, in all honesty. 

It is a tragic story for the family concerned.  Let's not use it as a lazy, low intelligence anti-EU argument.

[Richard Crowley]

Seeing that this is an area that is NOT regulated by the EU (an insurance when on the road is mandatory, of course), but by the individual member states, each having their own rules, your statement from across the pond is in the realm of "Trump truths".   'nuff said.   

Apparently you missed (or ignored?) the original post that said....

Court of Justice of the EU   Case C-80/17

Perhaps you could justify the EU "ROHS" circus?

[tom66]

As to "off road", we have the "Certificate of Non-Operation" which can be filed with DMV.  Even that is a bit squirrelly.  The buyer of such a vehicle can't drive it off until it has been registered.  It also makes it impossible for the seller to get a current Smog Certificate which is required to sell the car.  The smog certificate deal is a real complication.  You would have to re-register the vehicle (which costs money) then get the smog certificate and finally, sell the vehicle and send in the Release of Liability.  The new owner would re-register the vehicle and DMV will have effectively gotten 2 fees in a short period of time.  Having not been trapped in this deal, I don't know if re-registering a non-op vehicle requires a smog certificate.  If it does, there is no legal way to drive to the test station to get one.  Hence, no way to re-register...

Well, there are tow trucks, so it's certainly possible to fully legally get to a smog station.

Realistically/practically, I'd just print up a dated later stating what I was doing, sign it, and carry that with me. If a cop both catches me and wants to violate me for it, so be it... I've done far sketchier things with cars...

In the UK you are permitted to drive your car via the shortest practical route to the MOT station (equivalent to your smog/inspection) and also via the shortest practical route to a mechanic for repairs.  The catch is that it must be pre-booked and generally speaking, you need to go to the nearest station for each even if it's not your preference.  You are also allowed to drive to a post office to tax your car if it is untaxed.  In all cases you must have a valid insurance policy.

[julianhigginson]

That's a very sad story...

In NSW, Australia, you can't register your car without first having third party personal injury insurance (a green slip) - it's done automatically nowdays - without an insurer sending data confirming purchase of a greenslip to the RMS department, they will not register your car.

And it's a good thing, too... Because otherwise you'd have uninsured idiots driving about, messing up other people's lives and leaving their victims without any compensation... (Yeah it can happen with unregistered cars, but unregistered cars are also easier to pull off the road at a traffic stop, and unregistered drivers get hit with a heavy stick) You want the freedom of driving about? Then deal with the responsibility it entails.

[woodchips]

Thank you to all, been some interesting replies.

In the UK there is no restriction in owning any vehicle. SORN (statutory off road notice) tells the vehicle agency that whilst you own the vehicle, it is not going to be driven on any public highway, and this includes footpaths and bridleways. SORN only arrived about 25 or so years ago, so if your vehicle has not been taxed in that period then you don't need to SORN it.

There is a large and thriving do up car bunch of enthusiasts in the UK, see Practical Classics. So until you finally finish it and get it MoTed then it could be stolen and driven. Whilst you would insure it, does that include third parties? Don't know.

This judgement also applies to people, like me, with a wood and an old vehicle to get around. It is SORNed, but not insured. There is no requirement for it to be insured but it could still be stolen. What if it is an old JCB, takes an unauthorised trip to the closest cash point and digs it up? Who pays? If it is simply a method of making sure that whatever happens, someone can pay for the damage and injuries then why not say so? Wouldn't it be easier for every person to carry third party liability for this occurance?

Of course, none of this actually does anything for someone who is determined to break any law they can, every one else has to carry the can. Just go onto the DVLA website if sitting waiting in a traffic jam or car park and query the vehicles you see if they are registered or MoTed, might just surprise you.

[CJay]

It is, as far as I understand the law, this simple:

SORN it if it's off road, insure it if it's not SORNed.


If it has a SORN then there is no requirement to insure it as it will not be driven on the road.

If it is stolen while there is a current SORN and crashed by the thief it is not your responsibility (the police may ask some awkward questions if they think there's evidence that you have either driven it or allowed it to be driven though).

If you do not have a valid SORN in place then it can be driven on the road and should have insurance.

[mac.6]

Nothing new, France requires all motorized vehicule (all, only exception is child toys and eletric bikes) which have have a mean of transporting people and a steering to be insured (initial high court decision was for a lawn mower fatality). EU is enforcing this in all countries now.

What is mean is that if you have no specific insurance for your vehicule, you bear full responsability related to it, ie if there is an accident/incident with it, be on your property or not.

Yes there is a insurance fund for road victims, but it's for victims, not for owners. They will sue you (and win) if you are not insured. In the end someones is going to pay, better be an insurance than you.

[JohnPen]

As a kit car owner in the UK who uses a SORN for the winter 6 months I found the actual insurance cost for 6 months in the Summer was almost identical to that for the full year insurance so it stays insured.  However for longer periods of off road the SORN should cover one OK in the UK providing no-one steals it. While building my kit I always had it covered by insurance just in case garage fire, theft etc.  My annual insurance is < £200 a year.

[bd139]

In the U.K. this is pretty straightforward. A few years ago I sold a car and the new owner crashed it on the way home. At no point was I liable. He was uninsured and the vehicle was not taxed at the time. Once the paperwork is signed (take a date AND a time with the signature of the new owner) then your liability ends. Phone your insurer and get the vehicle taken off your insurance the moment you sell it as well.

If your vehicle is stolen, insured or not, SORN or not, the policy is void anyway as it’s always for named drivers in private ownership. The liability rests with the driver at the time if it’s stolen. If the owner gave permission knowing the driver was uninsured and the vehicle untaxed things are different.

Tax goes with vehicle ownership here now as well.