Trevz

I think its something to do with the climate control mate, is there a fan up there?

It's a thread about you, it's on the link above, but you might have to be a member to read it? If you just talk to Norwich Union they'll fob you off for sure because they dont want the hassle. You need to tell them you're taking legal advice and also suggest some bad publicity for them as you have a motoring journalist interested in your story. Possibly even Watchdog! Lay it on thick! Then suggest a letter from them stating that you were covered 3rd party would be a simpler solution for everybody. Here's the latest from your thread.. and let us know how you get on, cheers. Mr E 01:06 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 points would seem very very harsh indeed for an honest mistake. Dwight VanDriver 07:45 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deeps Have your friend visit CAB and a session with their free Solitor. There is more to this than he's letting on in my opinion. DVD oakky 09:29 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When you are given a producer don't you just take your docs to the local police station and show them to civilian at desk? In which case how would they pick up that the engine size is incorrect do the bib check the details there and then against the dvla database? Author Discussion loaf 12:50 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s143 RTA 1988 requires a policy to be in force for 3rd party risks in relation to the use by the driver of the vehicle, and a Certificate of Motor Insurance to be issued for same. Normally on a *certificate* the engine size is not noted, just the reg or chassis number - the detail goes on the Schedule - and the Cert is the only bit BiB would normally check. Even if the certificate was obtained fraudulently - and it sounds like it wasn't - the insurer is still liable in Law for the damages and would need to pursue a civil action against the driver for recovery. Sounds to me like a way overzealous BiB and a complete 2@ of a CPS brief - 'in the public interest' my @rse. A letter from the ins co stating that the mistake has been rectified, any additional premium paid, and that the car has AFATC been on risk since inception of the policy should do the trick, along with a few choice words from your own brief to the mag about the CPS's decision to bring the case in the first place. All IMHO, natch

Yes if you register the car in someone elses name you can drive it third party, but it wont be covered for fire or theft. The car doesnt have to be insured by anybody, but there's a debatable point of leaving an uninsured car on a public highway if you park it somewhere and you're not in it. You're ok to drive it though.

Always thought they were about the same perfomance stock, but obviously you dont know what mods someone has done. Sounds like this gto was well modded mate.

The thread is here: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=159453&f=10&h=0 You may have to be a member to see it I dont know, here's one of the posts anyway.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Slider Seems to me there is more in this than stated. See Section 148 (2) (f) Road Traffic Act 1988. Also a policy obtained by false and material representation remains valid re 3rd party risks at criminal law, until such time as Insurers have taken steps to avoid it.Duran v Maclaren [1956] backed up by Adams v Dunn {1978} Obviously a Co has avenues at Civil law to reclaim. But if things as stated then letter from Insurance Company should resolve. DVD [END] Still think you should see a good solicitor mate.

I've posted the question on a forum I know that's used by coppers, solicitors, etc (and anyone else) so I'll let you know the general opinion tomorrow .

Looks fine to me... but then I did have a yellow Z :-) so u might not rate my opinion lol.

a couple pics , looks nice from the back - stock except for the spoiler.

Looks good from the front and side, but dont like the back much, funny I've always hated veilside kits - they ruin nice cars, but that looks great on the whole. Mine does 17 mpg on average so not that bad compared to the Z. Mike, the stock sequential twin turbo takes some getting use to, the second turbo doesnt kick in 'till 4500 rpm, then it kicks you in the back! Alot of owners replace them with one big turbo tho it's less troublesome. The drive is very rigid and great fun, it does what you want, but there's no low down torque so if you dont like revving to the redline all the time then it's prob not for you. A mate took mine out and hated it, called it a rev box, coz he's used to a V8 twin supercharged - loadsa low down torque.

Just wondered if you saw my post above, it's worth trying to get a refund at the least.

Very nice, love the de-spoilered look, dont curb those wheels :-)

I think that means you have to spend about £1200. to get a tenner. Like you say it is better than nothing... just!

The link doesnt work for me mate..

Your situation sounds very unfair mate, are you tellin us everything? Did you get a solicitor on to this? So the insurance company didn't run the number plate through their data base? Did your dad give them the wrong registration number? What car were you actually insured to drive then? Did you have an insurance certificate for a Fiesta but with the wrong reg number? If yes, that's proof enough that it was a genuine error and a good solictor would sort you out I'm sure. And it would mean you were paying insurance on a car that belonged to someone else anywhere in the country, so claim the premium back for that!! If they say you weren't insured they cant argue your full refund. Are you the registered keeper of the car you weren't insured for, if not I take it your policy doesn't allow you to drive "any car not belonging to you" as most do. If it really was a genuine mistake you can sort it, did your dad do the insurance over the phone? If so, ask to hear the tape recording of that conversation , I wouldn't rest if it was me, give them some shit.. Cheers,

I had a bit of a race with an S14 in my RX, was amazed how quick it was - neck and neck to about 130 then I pulled away, and I was running with uprated boost so I imagine it was a modded S14?

Please vote if you have a minute, Thanks. http://channels.aolsvc.co.uk/news/article.adp?id=20050206054709990007

Thats right, in one case a pensioner was given a driving ban for warning traffic of a speed trap ahead. Just goes to prove that they dont actually want you to slow down. £££ Yeah GPS detectors are legal, so are radar/laser detectors at the mo, but they're going to be illegal in the very near future (ones that detect laser), GPS detectors will still be ok. Legrath, if you look at http://www.safecam.org.uk and click on 'camera locations' you can see whereabouts the mobile vans will be in our area every day for the next month - they're gonna be in Marine Drive, Burnham on Tues, never seen them there before.

Smokin!! Rip Gatso!!

Ah, hope I was drivin sensibly then.. you should've flashed, cant remember a saxo behind, not quite the same presence as ur Zed :-) never see it around Weston though.

LOL yeah mate, u still running on that Jap rubber then? Nah it doesnt matter how gd your tyres are , that roundabout is always slippy when damp, I fishtail there nearly every time too! Might be selling the RX in another month or so, had my fun with it now so look out for another Z about town soon :-)

Sad news. The Avon and Somerset safety camera partnership will be operating 24hrs a day from Monday 10th Jan. Obviously they're going to be alot more difficult to spot at night so be warned everyone form this area! I thought they were supposed to be a visible deterrent to speeding - yeah right!! Do other countys operate at night yet or are we the first here in Somerset?

I wonder what the lads parents are like?..two guesses Totally agree with ya, yoofs aren't stupid - they know they can do whatever they want and get away with it, raise a hand to them and you'll be the one getting prosecuted! Do-gooder nanny legislation as you say. If he hadn't been drinking this case probably wouldnt even have been in the media. A 13 year old is just as lethal joyriding sober or drugged and it happens everywhere everyday. Conscription and corporal punishment is deffo needed, but what chance in this country lol?

Sorry to state incorrect stats, the true figure is nearer 90% not 99.9%, although it was meant as a figure of speech to express a point. So there's still a 90% greater chance of dieing from a hospital contracted bug than being killed by a drunk driver. Im in no way suggesting that makes it acceptable to drink over the limit and drive, ofcourse it doesnt, but it does put it into perspective IMO, when we get bombarded with the dont drink and drive message every day on the tv at great expense, but hear nothing about how to help with eradicating something that kills nearly 10 times as many ppl per year. As for lack of sleep or fatigued driving, again that's a bigger problem than drunk driving and causes more deaths per year. The govt are just waking up to that one (pardon pun) and a few ads are appearing.

Very moving poem, clever emotional psychology. IMO the message should be dont get drunk and drive though, not 'dont drink and drive'. Millions of ppl will have a drink, one pint or a glass of wine and no more (yes really) and then drive this christmas and perfectly safely and within the law. Shame about the taboo this sort of emotional propaganda brings on them. It's OTT in comparison to the problem, you have 99.9% more chance of contracting the MRSA superbug in a hospital and dieing ( it killed 5000 ppl last year) than being hit by a drunk driver. Hope you dont all hate me for saying what I think :-)

83 in a 70! - you could have killed a child!! Seriously tho, very hard luck, infuriating is this sort of crap! Was it a traffic cop who stopped you or did you go thru a laser trap? Like everyones said, 3 points and 60 quid in stealth tax. :-(