Expired Licence & no NCT - Caught !!

Phoole

I don't know what was more foolish. Driving without a license or telling your story on this forum. Probably the latter, to be honest

I, for one, hope you get away with it!!!!

starn

Sorry Niamh. But deserved. Its just laziness on your behalf. But im glad your not tryin to defend yourself. So I have some sympathy for you. Otherwise I be calling for you to be taken off the road.


SEVEN YEARS. Unbelivable

doingmybit

jhegarty wrote: »

link ?

Also, just referring to an early post you did in relation to 3rd party insurance still in place if you have an accident. The correct fact to this is that the person with you and the person you hit are insured but not with the 3rd party of your insurance but with a general fund all insurance companies pay into and pay out of. So when you are unfortunate to get hit by lets say a joy (death) rider they are certainly not insured but this over all fund kicks in and the persons they hit are covered. :rolleyes:
Ask your insurance company and they will confirm this FACT

doingmybit

Phoole wrote: »

I don't know what was more foolish. Driving without a license or telling your story on this forum. Probably the latter, to be honest

I, for one, hope you get away with it!!!!

Well thank god she is on the minority of road users as AGS resources can be used to better needs at this time of the year

starn

Niamh have you consulted a solicitar at all regarding this. There seems to be a lot of people trying to scare you here with talk of 5 year driving bans and prison sentances and I think its all a bit uncalled for

jhegarty

doingmybit wrote: »

Also, just referring to an early post you did in relation to 3rd party insurance still in place if you have an accident. The correct fact to this is that the person with you and the person you hit are insured but not with the 3rd party of your insurance but with a general fund all insurance companies pay into and pay out of. So when you are unfortunate to get hit by lets say a joy (death) rider they are certainly not insured but this over all fund kicks in and the persons they hit are covered. :rolleyes:
Ask your insurance company and they will confirm this FACT

So insurance doesn't ever cover the person you hit ?

this makes no sense at all.....

doingmybit

jhegarty wrote: »

So insurance doesn't ever cover the person you hit ?

this makes no sense at all.....

Read the post correctly, there is a fund that all insurance companies pay into and if you drive a car that you have no insurance on, as you said in your past post that 3rd party is still in place, that comment is incorrect, the general fund is will pay out on all injuries to all people except yourself. The only exception to this is that if the car is stolen and the persons in the stolen car are not covered all other innocent parties are covered by this fund:D

jhegarty

doingmybit wrote: »

Read the post correctly, there is a fund that all insurance companies pay into and if you drive a car that you have no insurance on, as you said in your past post that 3rd party is still in place, that comment is incorrect, the general fund is will pay out on all injuries to all people except yourself. The only exception to this is that if the car is stolen and the persons in the stolen car are not covered all other innocent parties are covered by this fund:D

But no one was uninsured. The op had insurance.

doingmybit

jhegarty wrote: »

But no one was uninsured. The op had insurance.

I understand that, i was just clearing up a point that you made on an earlier posting regarding the insurance position of uninsured cars etc. It kinda went from the point of NCT and D.L. and that was the areas of posts i was making the insurance was secondary to that. thats all.;)

jhegarty

doingmybit wrote: »

I understand that, i was just clearing up a point that you made on an earlier posting regarding the insurance position of uninsured cars etc. It kinda went from the point of NCT and D.L. and that was the areas of posts i was making the insurance was secondary to that. thats all.;)

I was talking about someone who was insured, I never said anything about uninsured cars...

andrewh5

We need the same system here as in the UK.
No insurance - car is siezed on the spot.
No NCT - car is siezed on the spot.
No accompanying driver - car is siezed on the spot.
No licence - car is siezed on the spot.

Holsten

I agree except for the NCT.

doingmybit

andrewh5 wrote: »

We need the same system here as in the UK.
No insurance - car is siezed on the spot.
No NCT - car is siezed on the spot.
No accompanying driver - car is siezed on the spot.
No licence - car is siezed on the spot.

We have the first two and that does happen, in saying that NCT is a little bit less of an offense but you can still get you car siezed.
As for the accompanying driver - well a 1000 euro fine is now been activally followed through on these types of offenses and of course the points on ones licence is also been applied. No Licence well you have 10 days to produce it to you local garda station or a station of your choice an then if you fall to do so the garda will prosecute you. Just one thing, you are rushing to work car doesn't start, you take the wifes car that you are also insured on and you leave your licence in your car by mistake. You are driving to work, garda c.p. and bang, no dl and your car is gone. A bit unfair. And if you forget to change it from one of your coats and the same situation happens, bang, no car siezed by AGS. Common sense is always put into play by members of AGS they are no fools.:cool:

SV

towel401 wrote: »

thanks for reminding me of the government's ongoing quest to make it harder for people to drive a car.

Are you for real?

You should visit finland.

Cully

Niamh... I don't want to repeat anything that's already been said, but try not to worry about it and be as honest as you can. Most likely you'll get a fine & points... possibly a ban, but then a ban is no good if you're not legally allowed to drive.. is it?

Why not look into getting a Moped or something? 20 miles isn't that far... I cycle half that far every morning and evening to and from work.

The thing that I am kinda happy about in all of this is that you're finally going to sort out your license.. I personally am terrible with forms and stuff like that.... I've recently had to pay €80 for two toll passes on the M1 because I forgot to pay the €3 each online before 8am the next morning. Also, I got letters saying to pay within a week online and I was charged an extra €3 each... Didn't I get the letter on the 4th day after it arrived... I put it in my bag and said that I'll do it later when I'm at a PC.... forgot about it, then got a fine of €40 per each one for being a week old..

If you have bad organisational skills (like me) Ask your other half to help sort out stuff like this whenever it pops up, or force yourself to do something when it comes up rather than leaving it and you'll find it becoming a habit. Even something as simple as paying the electric bill straight away as soon as the bill comes in the door.. instead of waiting for a few days..

Good luck with it and let us know how it turns out.

andrewh5

doingmybit wrote: »

We have the first two and that does happen, in saying that NCT is a little bit less of an offense but you can still get you car siezed.
As for the accompanying driver - well a 1000 euro fine is now been activally followed through on these types of offenses and of course the points on ones licence is also been applied. No Licence well you have 10 days to produce it to you local garda station or a station of your choice an then if you fall to do so the garda will prosecute you. Just one thing, you are rushing to work car doesn't start, you take the wifes car that you are also insured on and you leave your licence in your car by mistake. You are driving to work, garda c.p. and bang, no dl and your car is gone. A bit unfair. And if you forget to change it from one of your coats and the same situation happens, bang, no car siezed by AGS. Common sense is always put into play by members of AGS they are no fools.:cool:

I meant no licence at all, not just not with you at the time. Having said that, it is a requirement to carry it with you when driving here so the 10 day rule shouldn't really apply. It is 7 days in the UK although they ring the DVLA and get an automatic check done now so can tell in a couple of minutes whether someone has a licence or not.

andrewh5

Holsten wrote: »

I agree except for the NCT.

Why not the NCT? It is the only tes of road worthiness we have so if a car does not have one it is reasonable to assume it is not roadworthy. The UK MOT is far harder and starts at 3 years and is then annual. No MOT, car is seized. The MOT database is all on the police national computer as well so they can tell before they stop you if it has one or not.

S.I.R

Niamh:>) wrote: »

Dear all,

Ive been a fool x 100%

I have been driving on an expired 1st Provisionl Liscense for the past 7 years.
I was never been pulled before and it has been the skeleton in my closet for a long time . I have no excuse. None whatsoever.
Was caught this morning with no NCT. I have 10 days in which to bring license & insurance cert to station, followed by NCT cert in Dec ( when test is due )
Im prepared for the book to be thrown at me. Was going to head to the station tomorrow and just own up to everything and basically try and plead my very sorry sad case.
My question i suppose is.. has anyone come across a case like this before and will i be facing an automatic ban from driving.

Thanks for any replies..

my best mate of all my lifes father got caught driving 20 year without a leicence with no test tax or even insurance...

banned for 2 years with a 21 stint in the joy...


Its worth it to stay legal !

doingmybit

andrewh5 wrote: »

Why not the NCT? It is the only tes of road worthiness we have so if a car does not have one it is reasonable to assume it is not roadworthy. The UK MOT is far harder and starts at 3 years and is then annual. No MOT, car is seized. The MOT database is all on the police national computer as well so they can tell before they stop you if it has one or not.

NCT is a far more comprehensive test then the MOT. Any garage who is licenced to carry it out can do in the uk, so can you imagine, wink wink nod nod, it happens wholesale in uk, my relation is a garage owner in england and confirms that this happens wholesale. You mightn't like the company that does it over here but it is less likely to be open to fraud. Ask anybody in the trade and they will confirm all this for you.

andrewh5

doingmybit wrote: »

NCT is a far more comprehensive test then the MOT. Any garage who is licenced to carry it out can do in the uk, so can you imagine, wink wink nod nod, it happens wholesale in uk, my relation is a garage owner in england and confirms that this happens wholesale. You mightn't like the company that does it over here but it is less likely to be open to fraud. Ask anybody in the trade and they will confirm all this for you.

I disagree on the stringency. having seen both carried out and seen the checklists I believe the MOT is far stricter.

It was possible to fiddle an MOT but it is nowhere as easy these days. Plus, if caught, the tester risks prison and the garage risks closure.

We should have annual testing here too though, given some of the wrecks you see being driven around.

doingmybit

andrewh5 wrote: »

I meant no licence at all, not just not with you at the time. Having said that, it is a requirement to carry it with you when driving here so the 10 day rule shouldn't really apply. It is 7 days in the UK although they ring the DVLA and get an automatic check done now so can tell in a couple of minutes whether someone has a licence or not.

Ya, but you give people the benefit. Yes, it is a legal requirement to carry your dl with you, but, thank god that AGS use discrision when it comes to things like that. If i stop someone, they don't produce the dl, i take details, confirm the details are correct, give him/her their legal requirement to produce dl in 10 days, 10 days or so later i check car reg, see if it was produced, if it was check that the dl was valid at time of stop, if it was all is ok, person is put out time wise and might learn to carry it with them in future to save hassle, if the dl isn't handed in or wasn't valid at time of stop then i will proceed to court on the matter and leave it to our legal system. I do believe that is a far fairer system then the uk. Can you imagine, stopping a car with no dl full of children, the mother is pleading with us not to impound the car, ya that looks great, now you have a car, a woman weeping, a 4 children crying, for what, no dl, something that can be sorted out within 10 days and nobody upset. Common sense i think, but common sense isn't that common, is it.

doingmybit

andrewh5 wrote: »

I disagree on the stringency. having seen both carried out and seen the checklists I believe the MOT is far stricter.

It was possible to fiddle an MOT but it is nowhere as easy these days. Plus, if caught, the tester risks prison and the garage risks closure.

We should have annual testing here too though, given some of the wrecks you see being driven around.

We agree to disagree, but i do agree on the point that the car should be tested every year. Fair point.

towel401

ClioV6 wrote: »

Are you for real?

You should visit finland.

you been watching top gear?

SV

towel401 wrote: »

you been watching top gear?

Yes?

andrewh5

andrewh5 wrote: »

I disagree on the stringency. having seen both carried out and seen the checklists I believe the MOT is far stricter.

It was possible to fiddle an MOT but it is nowhere as easy these days. Plus, if caught, the tester risks prison and the garage risks closure.

We should have annual testing here too though, given some of the wrecks you see being driven around.

Their is a fair bit of fiddling possible with the MOT in my opinion. A lad I used to work with when I lived in London last year had a friend that did MOT's he used to pass his car with a de-cat. He would have a 206 at hand and plug this in for the emissions test. He was telling me he would pass a car in most situations but never with anything dangerous wrong in fairness. He would also ignore number plate regulations etc. Obviously this was only done for friends of the garage and not everybody who had MOT's done there.

seanybiker

Phoole wrote: »

I don't know what was more foolish. Driving without a license or telling your story on this forum. Probably the latter, to be honest

I, for one, hope you get away with it!!!!

ha ha I'd rather get a hefty fine and a few pints than listen to all the high horse brigade posts I read in this thread. Jaysus people, nobody was killed or injured. She admitted she was wrong and feels bad about it. There's already about 200 posts saying " ah jaysus your thick, the gallows await" so why do so many people hop on the band wagon and go on about how stupid she was. I think she actually knows already that she was a bit stupid. Give the poor young one a chance before hang her.


Try not to worry about it girl. I know easier said than done but sure at least ya got the kick in the arse to get a permit now. Good luck.

Big Nasty

Agreed Seanybiker, lady already admitted she's wrong and a bit silly without being lambased by many users here. I'm sure she felt bad enough already!

seanybiker

seanybiker wrote: »

ha ha I'd rather get a hefty fine and a few pints than listen to all the high horse brigade posts I read in this thread.

ha ha, would love to get a few pints for getting caught with no license

seanybiker

Deleted User wrote: »

ha ha, would love to get a few pints for getting caught with no license

ha ha was looking at that meself when I was typing it in but couldnt figure out why.

DublinDilbert

doingmybit wrote: »

Ya, but you give people the benefit. Yes, it is a legal requirement to carry your dl with you, but, thank god that AGS use discrision when it comes to things like that. If i stop someone, they don't produce the dl, i take details, confirm the details are correct, give him/her their legal requirement to produce dl in 10 days, 10 days or so later i check car reg, see if it was produced, if it was check that the dl was valid at time of stop, if it was all is ok, person is put out time wise and might learn to carry it with them in future to save hassle, if the dl isn't handed in or wasn't valid at time of stop then i will proceed to court on the matter and leave it to our legal system. I do believe that is a far fairer system then the uk. Can you imagine, stopping a car with no dl full of children, the mother is pleading with us not to impound the car, ya that looks great, now you have a car, a woman weeping, a 4 children crying, for what, no dl, something that can be sorted out within 10 days and nobody upset. Common sense i think, but common sense isn't that common, is it.

To be honest it makes more sense to take the car on the spot, that's what they would done in Canada.

She wouldn't forget it twice would she?

Let say she says "i haven't got my licence with me", the garda lets her proceed (produce in 10 days), drives down the road and crashes killing a few people! "Ah sure we thought she had a licence"!