Vehicles kept off road require insurance

[woodchips]

I realise that this is getting pretty political, but seems so important that a wider audience is needed

Court of Justice of the EU

Case C-80/17

Vehicles kept off road require insurance.

As read in The Times, 30 October 2018.

As I understand the case.

A lady in Portugal took her vehicle off the road due to health reasons. It was parked on private property.

She had not taken any steps formally to withdraw it from use. Whatever that means.

Her son took the vehicle, without either her knowledge or permission, and killed himself and two passengers.

The court decided that the vehicle required insurance, even though it wasn’t used, had no intention of being used, was parked on private property.

Relevant directive is 72/116/EEC about insurance for civil liabilities.

What if someone steals a vehicle?

What if you are doing up a vehicle?

What is a vehicle? A mechanically propelled vehicle? So includes invalid buggies, ride on mower, machinery, almost anything?

Comments?

[Richard Crowley]

It is the EU. They are long past the era when it had to make sense in the Real World.   

[vk6zgo]

In my own State of Western Australia, registration of a vehicle includes compulsory third party insurance.

If you de-register the vehicle, it does not require insurance, but is illegal to use on the road.
Note:- If you keep registering  the car, it is assumed you can use it on the road.

Other Australian States have similar laws, except that you have to arrange the compulsory insurance yourself.

Possibly Portugal has similar rules, as well.

[nctnico]

It is the EU. They are long past the era when it had to make sense in the Real World.   

Sorry but that is utter nonsense. As the owner you are responsible for damage done with your car. This is true in the EU and the USA (and probably many other places). Because the (monetary) amount of damage can easely add up to more than anyone will ever earn insurance has been made mandatory.

Now in the case of the OP the car wasn't de-registered so the car will require an insurance. It doesn't matter what the intend was/is.

[Wilksey]

Yes, I heard that even if a car is SORN (Statutory Off Road Notice in the UK) that it has to still be insured.

If I am leaving a vehicle like that I always remove the battery though, so if they want to reconnect a battery and steal it then they can carry on!

Eejits!

[NivagSwerdna]

Yes, I heard that even if a car is SORN (Statutory Off Road Notice in the UK) that it has to still be insured.

Not true.
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/uninsured-vehicles " You do not need to insure your vehicle if it is kept off the road and declared as off the road ( SORN )."
However, the lady in question had seemly not declared it off the road (i.e. potentially on the road).

[nctnico]

Yes, I heard that even if a car is SORN (Statutory Off Road Notice in the UK) that it has to still be insured.

Not true.
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/uninsured-vehicles " You do not need to insure your vehicle if it is kept off the road and declared as off the road ( SORN )."
However, the lady in question had seemly not declared it off the road (i.e. potentially on the road).

In the Netherlands we have similar rules but when a vehicle is de-registered it may not be parked on a publically accessible road which includes your own drive way (for example).

[JPortici]

What if someone steals a vehicle?

What if you are doing up a vehicle?

What is a vehicle? A mechanically propelled vehicle? So includes invalid buggies, ride on mower, machinery, almost anything?

1)there are funds for victims of accidents where the offending party didn't have insurance. I don't remember why but it's them who had initiated the lawsuit. I remember i thought they had a valid reason

2)What do you mean?

3) Anything that is going to be on public street has to be insured. Some say bycicles, too.

If it was up to me, insurance should be tied to the driver and not the veichle.
For example, i got my first car this june. It doesn't matter that i've had a license and have been driving since 2009, i still had to start with the lowest class. In the past i had a couple of minor accidents and they were reflected on my dad's insurance because the car was registrated under his name.
Another example, you can pay a way lower premium if you are the only driver allowed to use the car. This is a problem for mechanics when they have to try vehichles on the road. And they can't use test plates anymore, because new legislation allow them to be used only on unregistered cars.

IF you needed an insurance to go around with a bike, a personal insurance would have even more sense

[GreyWoolfe]

Here in Florida, if the vehicle has a tag and is registered, you must have insurance.  If you cancel the insurance, you must turn in the tag.  When the insurance is cancelled, the insurance company is required to send a notice to the Division of Motor Vehicles so if you don't turn in the tag and receive a proper receipt for said tag, the DMV will suspend your license.  I am sure all the other states have similar if not the same laws.   I remember years ago as a Boy Scout Leader in New Jersey, the scout camp had a camp vehicle, an old Toyota truck that had no plate nor was it insured.  However, it was in such bad shape, it would never have passed state inspection or be road worthy.  It was perfect as a camp truck.

[CJay]

Just needed whatever the local variant of a SORN, it's another bullshit anti EU story.

[AndyC_772]

A related issue, which many people are still unaware of, is that your potential liability for a vehicle does NOT end when you sell it.

Have a read here; it's a story from a guy who sold his motorbike, but the buyer was uninsured and was involved in an accident.

The way the law works in the UK, is that the original owner's insurer is obliged to pay out, if the new owner doesn't have insurance. They in turn come after the original owner personally to recover their losses, on the grounds that the driver wasn't someone named on the policy.

The moral of the story is, just as you should take out insurance immediately before buying a vehicle, you should also be sure to cancel it immediately when you sell.

If your insurance has been cancelled, then your insurer isn't obliged to pay out if the new owner crashes it.

[rstofer]

A related issue, which many people are still unaware of, is that your potential liability for a vehicle does NOT end when you sell it.

For a private sale, in California, we have to send in a yellow form (Release of Liability) which has all the details of the sale - buyer, seller, mileage, amount, etc.  At that point, we have no further liability for the vehicle.

However, there is a period of time when things are pretty loose.  The Release of Liability is effective when DMV has posted it.  If you drop it in the mail, it may be a good long time before it is posted.  In any event, you don't even have to send it in for 5 days and the buyer has 10 days to re-register the vehicle.

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...

[ajb]

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...

Is there no temporary registration option? That's how my state does it, specifically to allow you to get a car to the required inspections to get a permanent registration (MD requires a comprehensive mechanical inspection before a car can be registered).

[Simon]

As far as i know a SORNed vehicle in the UK does not require insurance. In this case the vehicle was stolen so i do not see the problem.

[GeoffreyF]

What you miss is that if a vehicle has license plates on it - then it is only technically "off the road".  This has to do with whether the vehicle has valid license plates or not.

It has nothing at all to do with electronics.

[Gromitt]

What you miss is that if a vehicle has license plates on it - then it is only technically "off the road".  This has to do with whether the vehicle has valid license plates or not.

It dosn't work that way in Europe. The car can have valid licence plates and still be "off the road".

[Wilksey]

I did wonder the validity of the rumour as I have had cars SORN and uninsured in the past without any issues, I presumed it was a new rule, but perhaps the person that told me was misinformed.

I wasn't aware that you are liable insurance wise if the new owner crashes, i'd presumed that as long as you get a signed statement saying what time and day you sold the car anything there after was the new owners responsibility.
Typically if I sell a car it is uninsured for a day or two as i've swapped insurance over to a new vehicle, or I PX it and the dealer takes responsibility of it.

Does that ring true also if the dealer drives it without trade plates?

[SiliconWizard]

I think this was more or less already the case in a lot of countries before this EU decision, but...

Of course, it was not as plain a requirement as this, and more based on common sense, something the EU technocrats seem to be lacking of.

The key was usually that you needed an insurance for any vehicle that could cause any damage to a third-party even if just stored and never on road. Seems to make sense. For instance, a vehicle permanently parked in a shared building parking lot. Let's suppose it catches on fire and makes damages around it, you'd be considered responsible and would have better have an insurance for the vehicle to cover the damages, otherwise you could be in deep trouble (could even be an issue if someone accidentally hits your parked car and gets injured). Now if you were just parking your unused vehicle in your private property with no possibility of any third-party damage, you could of course not have any insurance. In case of any damage, your house insurance would usually cover it in that case, the vehicle being then considered as any other equipment you own.

Requiring an insurance in ANY case is of course avoiding ANY potential issue without the need of considering particular cases. This is exactly what a technocracy is all about.

[sokoloff]

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...

[langwadt]

What you miss is that if a vehicle has license plates on it - then it is only technically "off the road".  This has to do with whether the vehicle has valid license plates or not.

It dosn't work that way in Europe. The car can have valid licence plates and still be "off the road".

that depends, here you don't get the plates until you show that you have insurance and you have to insurance (and tax) until you return the plates, you you don't pay and/or don't show up for the biannual inspection the plates will be confiscated by police, until the plates are off the car the insurance will have
to pay. if you sell a car the buyer has 20 days to transfer the registration to a new insurance



 

[nctnico]

I did wonder the validity of the rumour as I have had cars SORN and uninsured in the past without any issues, I presumed it was a new rule, but perhaps the person that told me was misinformed.

You are probably not misinformed. In the OP's case the car was not 'SORned' but just not insured. I wonder how that is possible. In the Netherlands you'd get a very hefty fine automatically.

[Wilksey]

Well, here in the UK you can tax a car and someone else can drive it on their insurance or insure it themselves, so the owner - or registered keeper - does not necessarily get fined automatically for not having insurance unless they are caught driving without.

You can let the MOT expire, the only time I believe you get fined automatically is if you either don't tax the car or SORN it, but that is the registered keepers' responsibility, same as speed fines etc, it's up to the keeper to inform the 5-0 or DVLA who was driving at the time of the offence.

[SilverSolder]

It is the EU. They are long past the era when it had to make sense in the Real World.   

Seems that even intelligent people that have mastered a difficult technical discipline requiring a logical thought process seem to be unable to avoid the trap of blaming EU for rules that are the same (or worse) in most other jurisdictions.

It is of course especially amusing when our British friends have a go at EU rules, considering that they are bound by their very own 1872 Licensing Act which states: "It is Illegal to be drunk in the pub."!  The legislation adds: "Every person found drunk…  on any licensed premises, shall be liable to a penalty".   Visits to London would be a lot less interesting if anyone took any notice, certainly none of my English friends seem to be aware of it!

[Benta]

It is the EU. They are long past the era when it had to make sense in the Real World.   

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.

[NivagSwerdna]

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.