court judgment could result in increased motor insurance premiums in the UK|
Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs (FBHVC) that represents classic car
interests in the UK is very much aware of this matter. Information will probably
be included in the next FBHVC newsletter. Our NEWS item provides a prompt report
with links you can follow if you wish to learn more of this motor insurance development
and a DfT consultation attached to their paper.
the DfT could see it was not something we (motorists in the UK) wanted but until
we Brexit the wretched EU directives are an imposition that have to be complied
with. On scan-reading the paper and related links my initial reaction was one
of glazed boredom! If it had been after 6pm I would have gone and poured myself
a malt and began thinking of more interesting matters. Many might think that to
see mobility scooters and bicycles required to have insurance would be a very
good idea. I was nearly mown down by a wrinkly the other day on a mobility scooter
riding round a corner on a pavement with an air of casual unconcern about any
pedestrian and seemed deaf to my shout "look out you speed hog!". The
anarchy of some cyclists on public roads is a frequent cause for concern.
you have a family member suffering from insomnia then printing off a copy of the
DfT consultation document for their reading before going to sleep or on waking
during the night, is an almost certain cure and should have them dozing off within
UK Government is reviewing the law governing motor insurance which would provide
a route for compensation for victims of accidents involving motor vehicles in
a wider range of circumstances whist trying to keep the cost-burden to a minimum.
The UK Department for Transport (DfT) has released a consultation document saying
they "were prompted to review this area of UK law because of a legal case
heard by the European courts in 2014 which resulted in what is known as the "Vnuk
judgment". The DfT document sets out how the insurance provisions in UK domestic
legislation work at the moment and then explains why the Vnuk judgment means the
UK Government cannot maintain the law as it stands. Although the UK will in due
course be leaving the EU, until we do so all the rights and obligations that EU
membership entails remain. |
should you be concerned by what appears a very tiresome document?
simply that some of the options that will have to be examined to determine what
the UK Government will do to comply with this European court judgment (ECJ) could
result in a significantly increased burden for the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB)
role as a fund of last resort when insurance claims are not covered by the
scope of cover provided by a motor insurance policy or uninsured drivers. The
consequence would then be that the additional MIB funding burden would be passed
to insurers and of course then passed to UK policyholders in the form of raised
motor insurance premiums.
The SORN implications from options that
might be needed to meet the judgement are a real concern as most SORNS are used
by classic car enthusiasts whose cars are not yet covered by the rolling 40 year
VED exemption. At present a car on a SORN does not have to be insured for third
party risks - that might change or the SORN conditions might need to be changed.
The DfT consultation document sets out the options and some of the implications.
additional worry is that under the comprehensive option implementing the EU judgment,
the potential for an increase in fraudulent claims has been identified
as an unwanted risk. Section 9 of the DfT paper discusses how that risk might
be assessed and how the risk of fraud might be reduced should the comprehensive
measures be adopted by the UK Government to comply with the EU requirement. With
all the "crash-for-cash" claims we have seen in the UK in recent years,
most of which have clearly been fraudulent, the recent Autumn Budget statement
included measures to reduce that miserable area of activity which has had the
unwelcome effect of raising motor insurance premiums by a significant sum each
The DfT document also mentions a sunset clause to remove the
legislation that might have been enacted by the time Brexit occurs.
Technical consultation on motor insurance: consideration of the European Court
of Justice ruling in the case of Damijan Vnuk v Zavarovalnica d.d (C-162/13).
Weightmans - The implications of
the Vnuk case. The implications of the Vnuk ruling - the recent ECJ case which
means that cars driven solely on private property may need to be insured in future
and all motor insurance policies amended. More
Insurance Bureau (MIB) is to reduce the level and impact of uninsured driving
in the UK, to compensate victims of uninsured and untraced drivers fairly and
promptly, and to provide first class data asset management and specialist claims
services. Claims are dealt with by the MIB www.mib.org.uk.
The MIB is a fund of last resort and so will look to an insurer to deal wherever
possible. MIB is funded by a levy on every motor insurance policy taken out
currently around £30 per policy. In 1991 MIB took £50m levy from
UK motor insurers, in 2005 this levy was £330m. The MIB is not for profit