Declaring points to insurers - off after 4 but declare for 5
Discussion
Perhaps asking a silly question here, but just in the process of renewing this years insurance and looking to start with a new company - one of the questions is "Have you had any motoring convictions in the past 5yrs" and yes, I have. However, just gone on to the Gov website to double check the dates and there are no points showing. I got them December 2020, but as per the Gov site... as it was an SP30 it drops off after 4yrs, hence all clean. I'm slightly miffed that I'm being charged an additional £180 extra between a quote with a clean license and a quote with an SP30, more so as I technically have a clean license now... but suck it up buttercup etc, however just musing why the two aren't aligned. Is the 5 year declaration an insurance industry standard?
Think it's been that way for many years unfortunately. 3 years count towards a rolling tally in case of more offences towards a ban, etc. 4 years for your license before they come off but 5 years in terms of declaring to insurance. I agree, once they are gone after 4 years that should be that.
I think you'll find the extra charge is for using 'S' instead of 'C' on your licence :P (sorry, couldn't help it!)
It's annoying but sadly it's the rules so you should declare it. Personally not worth the risk of insurance getting a get out of jail free on paying out some/all of a claim based on supplying them incorrect/incomplete information.
It's annoying but sadly it's the rules so you should declare it. Personally not worth the risk of insurance getting a get out of jail free on paying out some/all of a claim based on supplying them incorrect/incomplete information.
Maybe it's changed - it's a long time since I was caught speeding - but back then, a single SP30 made sod all difference to the premium.
Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
Cheers, happy to declare them as no, I don't want to be in the position where non declaration comes back to bite me hard. My wife, who has surprised me there by pointing out that is it possibly because insurers run a year behind? Ie when I got the points in the December of 2020, I advised my insurer at the time an they didn't care... they advised that the policy would remain unchanged however come renewal (10 months later!) then the points would then be taken into account. So maybe this "extra" year declaration over and above the 4 years they are actually on your license is to make sure they get you for the full four years at an inflated premium.
Having had a bit of a play about, tweaking the excess and changing my wifes employment details has lessened the increase.... £331.00 for a clean license and then jumps up to £417.00 with the SP30 from 2020 declared, so an additional. Better than £180 (where they pulled that from is an unknown!) but still an additional £86 premium for an SP30 four years later smarts a bit, though I've been paying the price for the past 4 years however this is the first time I've had a "clean" license yet still have to declare the points in the eyes of the insurers hence wasn't sure if it was a standard across the board of if Go Compare / Compare the Market were at it...
Having had a bit of a play about, tweaking the excess and changing my wifes employment details has lessened the increase.... £331.00 for a clean license and then jumps up to £417.00 with the SP30 from 2020 declared, so an additional. Better than £180 (where they pulled that from is an unknown!) but still an additional £86 premium for an SP30 four years later smarts a bit, though I've been paying the price for the past 4 years however this is the first time I've had a "clean" license yet still have to declare the points in the eyes of the insurers hence wasn't sure if it was a standard across the board of if Go Compare / Compare the Market were at it...
davek_964 said:
Maybe it's changed - it's a long time since I was caught speeding - but back then, a single SP30 made sod all difference to the premium.
Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
It would appear that most charge for whatever they can get away with.Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
My wife picked up 3 points (SP50) for the first time in over 30 years of driving that seems to add at least £50 a year but on our two kids car's it is £200 extra to have their mum as a named driver.
I have one fault claim where I hit the rear end of a vehicle and this doesn't seem to make any difference on our son's car but when my daughter added me it went up.
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
curvature said:
davek_964 said:
Maybe it's changed - it's a long time since I was caught speeding - but back then, a single SP30 made sod all difference to the premium.
Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
It would appear that most charge for whatever they can get away with.Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
My wife picked up 3 points (SP50) for the first time in over 30 years of driving that seems to add at least £50 a year but on our two kids car's it is £200 extra to have their mum as a named driver.
I have one fault claim where I hit the rear end of a vehicle and this doesn't seem to make any difference on our son's car but when my daughter added me it went up.
Wife and I both have zero points - but I had a significant fault claim in Autumn 2022. It made sod all difference to my renewal, and when I added myself to her insurance 6 months ago it was still a tiny amount of money - half of which was likely an admin fee anyway.
You'd think that having an actual crash was likely to affect premiums more than "you went a bit fast and therefore might be a risk of crashing".
davek_964 said:
curvature said:
davek_964 said:
Maybe it's changed - it's a long time since I was caught speeding - but back then, a single SP30 made sod all difference to the premium.
Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
It would appear that most charge for whatever they can get away with.Even if all insurers do charge for a speeding offence that was over 4 years ago - surely they don't all charge that much extra? Is this the best available from comparison sites etc?
My wife picked up 3 points (SP50) for the first time in over 30 years of driving that seems to add at least £50 a year but on our two kids car's it is £200 extra to have their mum as a named driver.
I have one fault claim where I hit the rear end of a vehicle and this doesn't seem to make any difference on our son's car but when my daughter added me it went up.
Wife and I both have zero points - but I had a significant fault claim in Autumn 2022. It made sod all difference to my renewal, and when I added myself to her insurance 6 months ago it was still a tiny amount of money - half of which was likely an admin fee anyway.
You'd think that having an actual crash was likely to affect premiums more than "you went a bit fast and therefore might be a risk of crashing".
In your example their data would indicate that someone who had an accident 1-5 years prior to the current insurance year is statistically less likely to have a claim in (and/or the value of any claim is likely to be lower) in the coming 12 months than someone who hasn't had a claim in the last 5 years.
Speeding data must suggest the opposite.
But you're right it on the face of it premium behaviour does seem illogical.
QuattroDave said:
In your example their data would indicate that someone who had an accident 1-5 years prior to the current insurance year is statistically less likely to have a claim in (and/or the value of any claim is likely to be lower) in the coming 12 months than someone who hasn't had a claim in the last 5 years.
Now I'm annoyed. My insurance should have gone down after I crashed 
Mandat said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974If the police are happy for the points to be dismissed after 3 years then the legal system seems to have a mismatch.
davek_964 said:
QuattroDave said:
In your example their data would indicate that someone who had an accident 1-5 years prior to the current insurance year is statistically less likely to have a claim in (and/or the value of any claim is likely to be lower) in the coming 12 months than someone who hasn't had a claim in the last 5 years.
Now I'm annoyed. My insurance should have gone down after I crashed 
Austin Prefect said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
Edited by martinbiz on Friday 28th March 18:57
martinbiz said:
Austin Prefect said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
Austin Prefect said:
martinbiz said:
Austin Prefect said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
martinbiz said:
Austin Prefect said:
martinbiz said:
Austin Prefect said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
'but this was deemed unlawful by a High Court ruling in 2002, considering it a breach of duty to disadvantage a driver for a conviction considered “spent”.
I don't happen to know the name of the case, but so what? You doubted that insurance companies had ever ignored the 5 year rule and that there was a legal case to stop them doing so.
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Or just a way for them to give lower premiums to those of us who are careful enough not to have been caught for 5 years?When I had some points on my licence, it didn't make much difference, and the difference it made was negligible once the points were 2 or 3 years old.
Likewise when my partner had some points. It did affect which insurers came out cheapest though.
If the OP is paying an extra £180 for some 4 year old points, then I suspect he's basically in a high risk category to start with?
High risk car? Job? Age? Area?
Insurance is a competitive game, if another company thought the OP's risk was no higher than someone with a clean sheet, they'd offer a premium on that basis. It's a funny old game, some well known companies offer me a premium twice what I pay, but mysteriously they don't make squillions of pounds, their margins are not huge. They just work out the odds differently and end up with a different mix of punters.
The golden rule of being an underwriter is:
You don't want to insure unlucky people!
martinbiz said:
Austin Prefect said:
Simpo Two said:
Why is it 5? Just a way for insurance companies to make more money?
Rehabilitation of offenders act means the endorsement is spent after 5 years.There was a case of an insurance company asking for details of drink driving offences in the last 11 years, someone with an offence more than 5 years ago but less than 11 so it was still on his licence didn't mention it to the insurance company on the basis it was spent. When the insurance company tried to avoid paying out they lost the case.
Edited by martinbiz on Friday 28th March 18:57
The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act doesn't explicitly say how long a driving licence endorsement takes to become spent - the people who drafted it were thinking about offenders trying to get jobs when they get out of prison, not speeding drivers trying to save a few quid on their insurance premiums. So before that case there was genuine uncertainty about the question. You might take the view that:
(1) A driving licence endorsement is a penalty and gets a rehabilitation period of however long it stays on your licence for
(2) It is not a penalty but it is "another sentence", so gets a rehabilitation period of 5 years under a catch-all clause in the original legislation or
(3) It's neither a penalty not a sentence, and has no rehabilitation period. The rehabilitation period for the offence as a whole is determined by whatever other penalty you get for it (fine, prison sentence etc)
The insurance company argued (1), the Court of Appeal decided it was (2).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff