Mum’s anger after Hampshire police order her car be towed away in insurance row
18/1/12 SB Lee-Anne Taylor 33 of Gosport, who had her car towed away by the Police as she was not on the insurance database, she later proved that she was insured, but still had to pay �150 to get her car back Picture: Paul Jacobs (120190-4)
MOTORIST Lee-Anne Taylor is furious after an insurance blunder meant her car was towed away by police.
The 33-year-old is £150 out of pocket after officers wrongly suspected her of driving without insurance.
It later emerged she was fully covered by a policy she had bought the day before – but a delay in the database meant her details had not shown up.
By the time she proved her innocence, the car had been impounded and she had to pay £150 to have it released.
‘I’m just so angry about it and I want my money back,’ said Miss Taylor, of Jervis Drive, Gosport.
‘Within 20 minutes I was down the station with documents to prove I had insurance.
‘They said nothing was showing up, apparently because my insurance was valid from the day before.
‘I don’t care whose fault it is, I just want someone to pay the £150.
‘It’s just after Christmas, I’m a single mum and luckily I had the money spare because it’s my sons’ birthdays.
‘They always advise you not to keep documents in your car in case they are stolen but I would advise other drivers to take a copy to keep with them in case this happens.’
Hampshire Constabulary said Miss Taylor was stopped on January 13 because their police computer flagged her car as having no insurance.
Officers then checked with the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) but their database also had no results.
The 33-year-old could not show officers a print-out of her policy because it was at her parents’ house.
They offered to wait until the recovery truck turned up for her mother to arrive but she could not make it in time.
Miss Taylor’s insurance company, Asda, confirmed they sent her details to the MIB but said the database is not a real-time tool and is not 100 per cent accurate at any given time.
The MIB said her details went on the system at 6pm – six hours after the 33-year-old was stopped by police.
Hampshire Constabulary is refusing to refund the £150 as the car seizure was legitimate given the information available to officers at the time.
Spokeswoman Sally Adams said: ‘Even allowing for the delay in the insurance policy details to be transferred across to MIB, Ms Taylor was given the opportunity to show documents or provide further evidence of her insurance to the officers but failed to do so.
‘Officers made two database checks to verify Ms Taylor’s policy and in neither instance did the policy show up.
‘They then gave Ms Taylor the opportunity to show them her documents or at least give further details they could verify but she failed to do so.
‘On these grounds they were perfectly entitled to seize her car. We would suggest this is a matter for Ms Taylor and her insurers.
‘It would seem sensible to keep insurance documents or at least your reference number with you when driving.’
Asda spokeswoman Jo Newbould said: ‘In this instance it would appear the customer was covered but the police may have had reasonable belief the vehicle was not insured.
‘As it was later proven the vehicle was in fact covered we’d suggest the customer looks to the police to refund the costs associated with the vehicle’s seizure.’
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Portsmouth
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 22 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 24 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 51 comments to this article
Page 1 of 4
Bernard
Monday, January 30, 2012 at 10:35 AMBedhampton Paul. Yes my sentiments exactly. I am keeping an eye on the news looking to see an apology and her money refunded but I'm not holding my breath. The police aren't interested in good realtionships with the public though God knows why as it's the public that helps them to solve crime. The police force is now all about box ticking and Lee Ann was an easy box to tick.
Bedhampton Paul
Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 07:13 PMP.S. I'm looking forward to a postscript that says she has received a refund and apology from the Police. If she doesn't then it just proves that we live in a dictatorship with a police force who cannot admit they were wrong and don't want a good relationship with the public!
Bedhampton Paul
Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 07:09 PMIt seems simple to me... The Police used the information they had to hand BUT were wrong. Lee-Anne Taylor had committed no offence. Lee-Anne Taylor is owed an apology by the Police, a refund of her out-of-pocket expenses and compensation for her inconvenience. The Police meanwhile need to be aware of the update delays and have a process in place to deal with them.
dave3974
Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 05:41 PMan apolgy is now due , no wonder the police have a bad name
mje1972
Friday, January 27, 2012 at 12:15 AMr.e.-Lee Ann Taylor;I checked the MID just shortly before my insurance was due for renewal to find i was NOT registered and actually had to tell my own company to ensure i was shown as being insured.Had i been stopped,i am sure i would have faced the same predicament as this unfortunate lady-I would therefore urge EVERYBODY to check the database themselves online and contact their company ASAP if nessecary!
MurF
Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 12:53 PMSorry IanHenden, I don't agree. If they go back to a 7 day producer then were back to the old uninsured driver problem. It's not the polices fault, their doing a job.... The problem is with the insurers and database controllers, not the police. Just remember how much these uninsured drivers increase your premiums! Also remember you only have a right to driver on the road if your insured, taxed and licensed, if the police can't prove that then you don't have a right to drive your car on the highway. You could walk tho!
rubberman
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 08:57 PMsuch venom and bickering, but many interesting points, bottom line" if saw is not cutting or chisel not sharp....replace or repair" its a poor tradesman that blames his tools! Not hide behind the book make decisions what is front of you with your knowledge that you may not have all the correct information. Yes you will get some wrong but earn respect.
IanHenden
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 04:12 PMAgreed, Muf, but since it is known that the Magic Database is possibly 7 days out of date, the police should have given Lee Ann 7 days to produce her documents. She claimed she had insurance (correctly); and the police did NOT have any reason to disbelieve her, since they cannot rely on an out-of date database and they had no other corroborating evidence. They OUGHT to have issued a HORT1. And the powers-that-be ought to make sure that the rules for the Magic Database are tightened up, so that additions (and, indeed, removals) show up immediately. I myself have had similar trouble with Hampshire Police demanding to see a MOT Test Certificate that I had lost, I had to buy a copy (at £10) from the issuing garage, before they were satisfied, even though the fact that there WAS a current MOT in force showed up positive on the GOVERNMENT computer system!! The Police don't believe a Government computer when it suits them, and they do believe an unreliable civilian MID computer when it suits them. Lee Ann needs to claim all her costs from the Police and ASDA jointly - and let those two bodies sort it out between themselves what proportion they actually each do pay. If they can't agree, then she should sue them both jointly and let a Judge sort it out. She will win her case.
MurF
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 12:52 PMSorry folks, but carrying a Insurance document with you also dosen't work. Just watch a 'Police Camera Action' style program and learn. When the police stop an uninsured driver, the first thing they produce is the insurance doc.... but the police DONT accept them as the driver may not have paid the bill and therefore the insurance and document are void. The police will use the phone or database as no other record is up to date!
Alverman
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 11:38 AMThe police officer was applying the law as is his duty. The database not being updated appears to me to be the fault of the insurer and should and can be instant as soon as a policy is issued. I think that natural justice demands that the insurers recognise that Lee-Anne's misfortune is is due to their incompetence and that they should make recompense. unfortunately the seven days allowed for drivers to produce their documents at a police station cannot exist alongside the system that is reliant on the database.
Bernard
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 10:34 AMLike Gnorty Rascal and Skimmer 73 I do worry about peoples fundamental rights being eroded. People have wrongly been told to stop taking photographs by misinformed police, using the anti terrorism act. We ARE being conned and I'm afraid so many people are gullible enough to believe what they're being told and don't see it as an issue seeing the police and the state as always being right.. Well, they should because the more they get away with it, the more it will happen. I certainly think this case is grossly unfair and believe the police have committed an offence themselves. We all know these databases have anomaly's and the police should know this more than anyone. Some of us on here seem to have a better sense of right and wrong, what's just and unjust more than others. If I was a lawyer I would offer my services free of charge to Lee ann.
Grimbly
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 09:45 AMSo what law could the Chief Constable be charged under? Malfeasance in Public Office, or FRAUD!
IanHenden
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 08:51 AMApparently the Insurance Companies have SEVEN DAYS!! to update the Magic Database. Not a very useful tool for law enforcement, then, is it! Note that bigger systems than this can debit my current account at the bank in microseconds.... :o(
TomySurub
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 02:22 AMComment removed by moderator
gnorty_rascal
Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 12:45 AM@skummers 35 the law in this country remains based upon the principle of Innocent until proven guilty. I am fully aware that this principle is being eroded, particularly for motoring offences, but the fact remains, it is still officially the basis of our criminal law system. Lee-Ann Taylor was SUSPECTED of a crime. She has now proven beyond any doubt that she is innocent, yet is still expected to pay a penalty. This is appalling. Consider the other areas where innocent until proven guilty principle is less potent than previously. Sex offences and terrorism. Motorists are somehow in that same group? I do not know if you are a motorist, but a safe assumption that you are. You really should be concerned about this. Even if you are not a motorist, the erosion of this core priciple should worry you. It is OK to sit in the self belief that you are not a criminal so you have nothing to fear, but this is also constantly changing and everyday things become criminal with just a change of law. One day, it might come to you, and by then any hope of a fair hearing will be gone forever.
Page 1 of 4
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.