No insurance and I meet the Gardai - what next?

Henry Ford III

My point was dressing up and being apologetic won't right the wrong.

I don't think a cop would or even could decide not to proceed with a case on that basis.

johnny_adidas

Duckjob wrote: »

Some of these measures mentioned have been known to work in the past. Just because the OP knows he made a mistake it doesn't mean he can't try to make the best of the situation now within the boundaries of the present system.

Thats exactly my point, he cant make it any worse but its worth half an hour of his time if it does make it better

and as for

LuckyStar wrote: »

Maybe you judge people on shallow things such as their appearances or jobs, I however prefer to judge people by their actions.

suppose next you're going to say that the gardai (or judges for that matter) dont judge people on that criteria? :rolleyes:

Duckjob

Henry Ford III wrote: »

My point was dressing up and being apologetic won't right the wrong.

Indeed. Nothing will, unless the OP has a time machine to hand.

I don't think a cop would or even could decide not to proceed with a case on that basis.

Maybe not, but as has been pointed out, it's a nothing-to-lose situation. The guard might be inclined to put in a good word for the OP in court and give the Judge a more positive impression of the OP.

January

maidhc wrote: »

A few facts

1) You cannot backdate an insurance policy

That's wrong on a few counts...

1) If you forget to pay your premium on your renewal date and you ring up within a month of your renewal date to pay it then they will back date your insurance policy, to the date that it was supposed to be renewed on, provided you have no had an accident. They make sure you have not had an accident before taking payment off you and tell you that if you make a claim for the period that you didn't pay then you are not covered for the claim.

2) If you aquire a car at the weekend, and ring up first thing Monday morning to change it over and tell them you got it on Saturday/Sunday then they will allow you to back date it to the the day.

I've done it a few times, insurance companies use their discretion, but the OP probably lost his window as it's not Monday morning anymore.

dlofnep

A bit silly of you, but a 1 year ban is excessive in your case I think.

great unwashed

kida wrote: »

OP - just as matter of interest what was the car and were you really doing 25?

It was a Renault Clio and yes, absolutely, I was doing 25 (the road has grass in the middle) - the Law even saw me.

LuckyStar

johnny_adidas wrote: »

Thats exactly my point, he cant make it any worse but its worth half an hour of his time if it does make it better

and as for


suppose next you're going to say that the gardai (or judges for that matter) dont judge people on that criteria? :rolleyes:

Dunno, can't read their minds, can you?

jimmycrackcorm

great unwashed wrote: »

My name wasn't on the registration at the time but no matter, my own insurance company told me my insurance didn't cover me in the circumstance (I have a provisional licence)

Was that because your policy doesn't allow third party cover to drive other cars or that you blatently told the insurance cover that you were buying the car. If it's the former then I would simply go down to the station and show the guard the certificate with the clause and sya it was my brothers new car.

Henry Ford III

In which case his brother would get done for no insurance. In addition OP has already said he had no "3rd party extension" on his own policy either due to being a provisional license holder. So he'd still get done.

Genius.

denashpot

any upadate on the situation?

lightening

Henry Ford III wrote: »

My point was dressing up and being apologetic won't right the wrong.

However, it can make all the difference. Believe me... (from experience)

Jo King

Did the registered owner of the car have any kind of insurance policy covering the vehicle at the time?

Would the registered owner be prepared to say that he instructed you to drive the car at the time.

If the answer to either of the above questions is yes then there is a defence available in court. I have seen a barrister get people off in these situations.

DamoDLK

First of all you will be before a District Court judge on a summary offence. There is no need for barristers as previously mentioned. Your family solicitor can act in DC for you.
If you present yourself on time and in the right court room!! Dressed well and demonstrate remorse for your act you'll be grand. I doubt that the Gardai (who will be on prosecution side) will have any reason to recommend that you be banned from driving for a prescribed period. Its unlikely that the Judge will feel it necessary too. Bring a token sum of money for the Court Poor box (€500 or so) and you'll get off with a possible endorsement but with no ban.

Damo

Jo King

I am talking about getting off. If the answer to both of the above questions is
no, then it is most likely a mitigation plea. Depending on where you District Court is you may get either a solicitor or barrister (sometimes cheaper in Dublin) to represent you. Go down to your local District Court when it is sitting for traffic offences. You will soon see the form of the judge.
If a defence is possible then you will certainly need a barrister as most solicitors are not aware of the possible defences.

DamoDLK

First of all i'm frequently in the court. not on the wrong side of the law tho!! there is no doubt that the act was mitigating in its circumstances viz a viz no one was injured!
Secondly, this is true that you instruct your legal representative to act on your behalf, but its also true that a barrister would be like sending in a tank in to crush a snail in this circumstance.
thirdly, to get a true idea of the "form" of judges you need to go beyond more than one local DC!! Punishment ranges from fines on one end to being banned on the other.. it depends on who is sitting and where. Did you ever hear of Forum Shopping!!?

Jo King

There is no such thing as forum shopping in court. You get a summons to a particular District Court and you go there. Most of the time outside Dublin the same judge sits regularly and it is possible to discern his attitude from a visit to his court. For example in Bray the judge gives a three month prison sentence for a second no insurance conviction. The only reason for getting a barrister is if there is an arguable defence, and the solicitor is not familiar with it. I frequently see people advised by solicitors plead guilty to insurance charges when they have perfectly good defences.

DamoDLK

Jo King wrote: »

There is no such thing as forum shopping in court. You get a summons to a particular District Court and you go there. Most of the time outside Dublin the same judge sits regularly and it is possible to discern his attitude from a visit to his court. For example in Bray the judge gives a three month prison sentence for a second no insurance conviction. The only reason for getting a barrister is if there is an arguable defence, and the solicitor is not familiar with it. I frequently see people advised by solicitors plead guilty to insurance charges when they have perfectly good defences.

I'm not being a smart arse here chap, but you are clearly unfamiliar with detailed working of the court system. Forum Shopping as i called it exists in the jurisdiction I]frowned upon naturally[/I you petition the court for a stay on proceedings and seek relocation, you need a valid reason for this. This effectively means that you can shift to a new forum. It is true that it is not the same as it would be in Family Law matters. I am not being critical of your apparent legal knowledge - but second offences go way beyond the scope of the present context and don't need to be considered here. This appears to be the OP's first motor offence. And finally: can you please name one instance where a good defence existed and a solicitor advised client otherwise??

Slidey

well i can, solicters like the easy route, plead guilty mate, if you go with not guilty and lose you'll get a wild fine, judge will goeasy on ya if you own up etc etc
BTW sister is a lawyer so im not totally against them!

DamoDLK

Then surely no good reasonable defence existed?

Jo King

DamoDLK wrote: »

I'm not being a smart arse here chap, but you are clearly unfamiliar with detailed working of the court system. Forum Shopping as i called it exists in the jurisdiction I]frowned upon naturally[/I you petition the court for a stay on proceedings and seek relocation, you need a valid reason for this. This effectively means that you can shift to a new forum. It is true that it is not the same as it would be in Family Law matters. I am not being critical of your apparent legal knowledge - but second offences go way beyond the scope of the present context and don't need to be considered here. This appears to be the OP's first motor offence. And finally: can you please name one instance where a good defence existed and a solicitor advised client otherwise??

The chances of having an insurance summons moved must be miniscule. What kind of a reason could be offered? There are possibly tactics to delay matters in the hope that a different judge will hear the case on the adjourned date.
In any case all you can do is have a District Court hearing outside of Dublin moved to Dublin. In many cases it is entirely predictable which judge will be hearing the case.
I can give you numerous examples where I have seen solicitors and barristers plead guilty when there was a defence available. I saw one solicitor do it twice in Bray three weeks ago, on a car insurance case. there was insurance on the car, the guy just wasn't named on the policy. Solicitor pleads guilty! I have seen a barrister get someone off in that situation, using an EC Directive.
I gave the Bray example as a clear example of the form of a judge, not as a general discussion of second offences.
What the o/p did was idiotic and he is going to learn an expensive lesson one way or the other. If he can avoid conviction so much the better and if not then he can try and minimize the punishment.

DamoDLK

Jo King wrote: »

The chances of having an insurance summons moved must be miniscule. What kind of a reason could be offered? There are possibly tactics to delay matters in the hope that a different judge will hear the case on the adjourned date.
In any case all you can do is have a District Court hearing outside of Dublin moved to Dublin. In many cases it is entirely predictable which judge will be hearing the case.
I can give you numerous examples where I have seen solicitors and barristers plead guilty when there was a defence available. I saw one solicitor do it twice in Bray three weeks ago, on a car insurance case. there was insurance on the car, the guy just wasn't named on the policy. Solicitor pleads guilty! I have seen a barrister get someone off in that situation, using an EC Directive.
I gave the Bray example as a clear example of the form of a judge, not as a general discussion of second offences.
What the o/p did was idiotic and he is going to learn an expensive lesson one way or the other. If he can avoid conviction so much the better and if not then he can try and minimize the punishment.

Fair points, well made...