Summons for no insurance
- Thread starter Jdoe1234
- Start date
DirectDevil
Registered User
- Messages
- 895
I am a little puzzled by some of the details here 
Is OP saying that he is insured under the DOC extension of the motor policy for the car he sold ?
If so, that argument may be defective.
Once you sell a car the motor insurance policy on it is effectively inoperative for two reasons (possibly the same reason) ;
(i) Insureable interest ceases to exist and or
(ii) The subject matter of the policy has been disposed of.
Is OP saying that he is insured under the DOC extension of the motor policy for the car he sold ?
If so, that argument may be defective.
Once you sell a car the motor insurance policy on it is effectively inoperative for two reasons (possibly the same reason) ;
(i) Insureable interest ceases to exist and or
(ii) The subject matter of the policy has been disposed of.
DirectDevil
Registered User
- Messages
- 895
An additional issue occurs to me namely that of ownership.
Specifically, at what point does the ownership of the vendor [OP] cease and the ownership of the purchaser commence ?
Is it the date on which the local authority or the Department of Transport - whichever applies - register the change ?
Is it the date on which the relevant paperwork is posted to the local authority / Department of Transport ?
Is it the date on which the vendor [OP] receives the contractual consideration from the purchaser ?
My point is that if the OP was still technically the owner of the vehicle when stopped by Gardaí he might well be validly insured if he did not cancel the policy before he was stopped. In that event the DOC issue is nugatory as the insurance was in place.
In relation to OP's possession of the vehicle after it was "apparently" sold it might be argued that he was holding it on trust pending completion of the sale and purchase.
If OP was still the technical owner when stopped he will cop it for the road tax issue as he already accepts.
If OP was not the technical owner when stopped he might escape the road tax charge.
There is much here for the OP to explore with his solicitor with a view to clarifying the exact possibilities or even raising reasonable doubt.
Strange though it may sound it is possible for a person to be without valid motor insurance when stopped but to be acquitted of the charge if there is reasonable doubt about the surrounding evidentiary issues relating to how the situation came to pass. It is for the District Justice to determine this issue if the charge is being contested.
That said the courts take a fairly serious view of driving without insurance which is why it is a mandatory court appearance.
Specifically, at what point does the ownership of the vendor [OP] cease and the ownership of the purchaser commence ?
Is it the date on which the local authority or the Department of Transport - whichever applies - register the change ?
Is it the date on which the relevant paperwork is posted to the local authority / Department of Transport ?
Is it the date on which the vendor [OP] receives the contractual consideration from the purchaser ?
My point is that if the OP was still technically the owner of the vehicle when stopped by Gardaí he might well be validly insured if he did not cancel the policy before he was stopped. In that event the DOC issue is nugatory as the insurance was in place.
In relation to OP's possession of the vehicle after it was "apparently" sold it might be argued that he was holding it on trust pending completion of the sale and purchase.
If OP was still the technical owner when stopped he will cop it for the road tax issue as he already accepts.
If OP was not the technical owner when stopped he might escape the road tax charge.
There is much here for the OP to explore with his solicitor with a view to clarifying the exact possibilities or even raising reasonable doubt.
Strange though it may sound it is possible for a person to be without valid motor insurance when stopped but to be acquitted of the charge if there is reasonable doubt about the surrounding evidentiary issues relating to how the situation came to pass. It is for the District Justice to determine this issue if the charge is being contested.
That said the courts take a fairly serious view of driving without insurance which is why it is a mandatory court appearance.
OP earlier stated:
So my take is they are relying on the DOC element of a valid policy on the other car they owned at the time.
The fact that the car that was bought for the OP's mother's use has seemingly been so quickly scrapped might raise questions.
It is scenario three.
As soon as the purchaser pays all monies for the vehicle and both parties sign and date the transfer of ownership on the VLC.
Not true.
It is irrelevant who owns the car when dealing with a non valid road tax (or whatever it is called now) disc, it is the driver
of said vehicle at said time.
We could be here 'till the cows come home discussing the ins and outs of this, but we have VERY little info to go on and what info we have is at best equivocal.
Last edited: