Compulsory motor vehicle insurance, proposed changes.

[charlie]

Looking on one of the motorsport sites I found this, which could have implications for our hobby.
A lot to read but necessary to understand what could happen and why. Vnuk Judgement There is also an online petion.

[alan]

Charlie

I’ve been reading about this and it’s quite interesting.

Just found the following text:

“In a recent case Damijan Vnuk v Zavarovalnica Triglav C-162/13, in the European Court of Justice, the courts ruled in favour of a plaintive claiming compensation after being involved in an accident. Mr Vnuk had fallen off a ladder hit by a tractor and trailer during the stacking of hay bales in a barn. After initially being dismissed by Slovenian courts it was later decided in the European courts that the concept of “vehicle” within the meaning of the European Directive on motor insurance (72/166/EEC) bore no relation to its use.

The implication now is that because of the Vnuk case, RTA (Road Traffic Act) compulsory motor insurance may now extend to “any use of a motor vehicle consistent with the normal function of the vehicle and anywhere”, it will no longer be limited to being in use on a road or public place. Following the conclusions of the case, the definition of a vehicle could change to “any motor vehicle intended for travel on land and propelled by mechanical power, but not running on rails and any trailer whether coupled or not”.

If this is the case then it could take up to 12 months to change the RTA and it will have to be approved by Parliament so nothing will happen immediately”.

[charlie]

It is going to be an absolute nightmare to draft legislation and even harder to enforce.
The police have trouble catching all the uninsured car drivers at present, how would they cope with everything else added.

[hdtrust]

I should forget about European laws by the time this will come through we will not be part of Europe!
Remember Brexit

[wristpin]

“I should forget about European laws by the time this will come through we will not be part of Europe!”

Nice thought, but our civil servants will probably adopt the European Standard and add a few obscure tweaks of their own just to justify their existence.

[charlie]

Latest update.
The FBHVC have now submitted their response. I gave them some input regarding the type of machines our members own and the impact any changes to legislation could have. I also sent a response on behalf of the club and another myself.
The following is an extract from the latest issue of the FBHVC newsletter, ‘The intention of the Federation would be to propose solutions which are as favourable to our membership as possible. Not all readers will realise that amongst our members are the owners of historic mowers and similar equipment! They deserve our support as much as any other category of member.’
We will now have to wait and see what happens next.

[trusty220]

It’s amazing that even at this late stage the powers that be are still trying to toe the line with Brussels/Strasburg/Wherevertheyarethisweek. Our best hope is that it takes so long to work it’s way through the procedures that it won’t be needed after all.

I wonder why the whole thing has blown up to this level? If the accident happened in this country it would have been dealt with by the employer’s insurance.

Oh dear, I’m off again, don’t get me started!!!

[stevewoollas]

This is potentially an interesting development which may or may not impact upon insurance regulations in the UK. The case is question appears to be (as Geoff points out) based around a situation where there appears to be a lack of suitable employer liability insurance, RTA cover for the vehicle involved or a level of public third party liability. This situation should not happen in the UK with VHGMC club members as public third party liability for pedestrian machines is provided by a responsible insurance company (NFU Mutual). We make it very clear that ride-on machines require an RTA insurance policy in force and the NFU Mutual (and other companies) will provide competitive quotations and policies for ride-on machines so there is no excuse in not being suitably insured at events.
Should legislation change and further levels of insurance be required I have every confidence our insurers will via our broker (BAVCC) advise the club of any such change and policies suitable to continue with our hobby within the constraints of the law.

[trusty220]

The main reason that we are getting involved is that it looks like we may have to insure all of our collection, whether they are being exhibited at an event or not. The original court case was based on a farmer reversing a trailer into a barn and knocking somebody off a ladder- plainly not a public place and all occurring on private land.

The rumour is that we shall have to insure all of our collection at all times; this could be a problem to those members who have upwards of twenty Trusty’s, or any other make for that matter. Potentially a trespasser could come onto private land and injure themselves on some machinery and then be able to sue you for letting them hurt themselves.

I wouldn’t put anything past the law-makers these days, so we are trying to make sure that this does not come to be an issue.

[trusty220]

In addition to my comments above, the proposed law will effectively do away with the SORN declaration for road-going vehicles. Many of us run vintage vehicles as well, maybe as transport for our machinery, and it is a useful fall-back occasionally to be able to mothball our vehicles by declaring them to be off-road (or SORN-ed). I did it myself a couple of years ago when I lost the keys to my GT6 and missed the MOT date.

Under the new legislation I would have to continuously insure my car even if I wasn’t using it. As far as I can see this would also apply to vehicles awaiting restoration and un-roadworthy.

Clearly a backward step to put us in line with Eastern European legislation. Why???

[charlie]

A summary of the consultation is available at gov.uk website You will see our club (VHGMC) is listed at the end amongst the organisations that responded.

[Author]

Posts