Suppurating fannywickets. Nicked again
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: Colin Irvine on 27 Apr 2010 15:20 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 18:46:29 GMT, YTC#1 squeezed out the following: >On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:02:03 +0100, Colin Irvine wrote: > >> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:40:42 +0100, YTC#1 squeezed out the following: >> >>>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:29:19 +0100, Daz wrote: >>> >>>> On 27/04/2010 10:23, petrolcan wrote: >>>> >>>>> On for four years and points does not equal a conviction. >>>> >>>> Any ins co I've ever dealt with asks the standard question "Any >>>> accidents, claims or convictions in the last x years" for which the >>>> latter definitely included points. >>>> >>>> So if you got 3 points for either speeding or perhaps an illegal tyre >>>> you wouldn't declare this when asked the above question? >>> >>>Hmm, it ammounts to what a conviction means. >>> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction >>>http://www.google.co.uk/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en| >en&hl=en&q=conviction >>> >>> >>>If you don't go to court, are you "convicted". >> >> Well you're hardly innocent. > >No the same thing, being guilty and being convicted are separate things. Indeed. And anyone who finds themselves uninsured because they didn't declare a fine or points would be welcome to try that line of argument. As it happens, most companies I've dealt with have explicitly excluded speeding offences. But otherwise you need to remember that insurance contracts are contracts of utmost good faith. -- Colin Irvine ZZR1400 BOF#33 BONY#34 COFF#06 BHaLC#5 http://www.colinandpat.co.uk
From: YTC#1 on 27 Apr 2010 15:43 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:20:08 +0100, Colin Irvine wrote: > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 18:46:29 GMT, YTC#1 squeezed out the following: > >>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:02:03 +0100, Colin Irvine wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:40:42 +0100, YTC#1 squeezed out the following: >>> >>>>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:29:19 +0100, Daz wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 27/04/2010 10:23, petrolcan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On for four years and points does not equal a conviction. >>>>> >>>>> Any ins co I've ever dealt with asks the standard question "Any >>>>> accidents, claims or convictions in the last x years" for which the >>>>> latter definitely included points. >>>>> >>>>> So if you got 3 points for either speeding or perhaps an illegal >>>>> tyre you wouldn't declare this when asked the above question? >>>> >>>>Hmm, it ammounts to what a conviction means. >>>> >>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction >>>>http://www.google.co.uk/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en| >>en&hl=en&q=conviction >>>> >>>> >>>>If you don't go to court, are you "convicted". >>> >>> Well you're hardly innocent. >> >>No the same thing, being guilty and being convicted are separate things. > > Indeed. And anyone who finds themselves uninsured because they didn't > declare a fine or points would be welcome to try that line of argument. > > As it happens, most companies I've dealt with have explicitly excluded > speeding offences. But otherwise you need to remember that insurance > contracts are contracts of utmost good faith. IIRC, the speeding/points bit is usually separate from convictions on the form I have filed in. But I would not put speeding in a conviction box, that is (IMO) for DD etc.
From: CT on 28 Apr 2010 03:50 zymurgy wrote: > On Apr 27, 9:08�am, "CT" <m...(a)christrollen.co.uk> wrote: > > TOG(a)Toil wrote: > > > > Oh, I see you speak fluent "Nige". > > heh, I saw what he did there .. I'm glad it wasn't wasted on everyone. -- Chris
From: Grimly Curmudgeon on 28 Apr 2010 08:49
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> saying something like: >> I've never been asked either - well, not that I can recall. But then >> I'm not a recidivist like Ogden. > >Recidivist? I've not run over a single nun since my day in court! The bus queue might differ. |