Police Scotland is putting the spotlight on uninsured drivers this week by highlighting the consequences of being on the wrong side of the law.
Through Operation Drive Insured Scotland (22-28 January), police forces are showing how their officers are working alongside key partners to tackle the issue – including the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB).
The campaign includes enforcement activity from Police Scotland, using intelligence to target potential uninsured drivers and hotspots.
The campaign also aims to highlight some of the common myths about motor insurance including those surrounding ‘fronting’. It reminds motorists that the policyholder should always be the most frequent user of the vehicle, and the named ‘main driver’ on the insurance policy.
Other myths ‘debunked’ include those concerning driving other vehicles and driving to or for work.
Chief superintendent Stewart Carle, head of road policing for Police Scotland, said: “This campaign will be delivered through a combination of mobile and static road checks, involving all road policing officers across Scotland with support from divisional colleagues across the entire country.
“Officers will be using the latest intelligence to target potential uninsured drivers and hotspots, and by doing this we hope to minimise the inconvenience caused to the general public while maximising the effectiveness of the operation.
“Ultimately, the honest motorist is penalised by having to pay higher premiums as a result of claims arising from uninsured losses.
“Campaigns such as Operation Drive Insured aim to decrease this negative impact for all honest motorists while contributing to the overall safety of our roads.”
Paul Bennett, MIB’s national police liaison officer, said: “Police Scotland are extremely proactive about tackling uninsured driving. In the last three years alone they have seized nearly 23,000 uninsured vehicles.
“This is the second year running for Op Drive Insured with Police Scotland and we want to use this as an opportunity to highlight the importance of making sure that you are correctly insured for each and every journey you take.”
Having one less piece of paper would certainly swing it for me – the space saved could possibly be utilised by another piece of paper which hitherto, I have not had space for in my house.
Hugh Jones
0
I absolutely agree Charles, I have been advocating that system for years.
The government should purchase 3rd party insurance and road tax for all road users and we then pay that cost via a fuel subsidy. Benefits include:
Reduces global warming, congestion and collisions as the less we drive, the less we pay (strong incentive to use public transport, use more efficient vehicles or drive more carefully).
Motorists only require 2 pieces of paper (Licence and MOT).
Free up £millions of police and court resources.
No need for any SORN system or use of ANPR cameras.
etc …
dave finney, Slough
+6
I find it hard to believe that in 2018 we are still using this archaic and unsupportable model of 3rd-party road insurance.
Every time they go out, each and every road user in the UK runs the risk of having to bear the cost (which could be unaffordable for many) of the actions of other (uninsured) road users. Police forces are stretched enough as it is, without having to apply themselves to trying (and inevitably failing) to enforce the unenforceable requirement of insurance. And even if every motorised road user did have 3rd-party insurance cover (a pipe dream), that would still leave the matter of losses caused by non-motorised users such as cyclists and pedestrians.
How about a scheme based on the one in use in New Zealand? There each person (resident or visitor) is automatically covered for accidental injury (however caused) by a state-run universal insurance scheme. Hence there is *no* compulsory motor insurance in NZ (motorists unavoidably contribute part of the cost of it through a fuel levy) and hence no need to waste police time trying to enforce it. Interestingly too, their motorists have roughly the same level of voluntary insurance cover (presumably to cover material damage) as those in countries where it *is* compulsory.
Think of the billions of pounds that have been wasted in the UK over the decades, and the loss to countless millions of individuals, because of the insurance model we seem to think is an “essential” part of road safety here in the UK.
Ref: http://www.transport.govt.nz/land/vehicleinsurance/
Charles, England
+7