Driving without a licence (UK)

[britishnick]

I just called the DVLA to ask if there is a statute or law that requires me to apply for a licence to drive a private automobile. The lady didn;t know, but suggested I look at the road traffic act 1988, which I did but it's huge.

quick google, this came up: (I emailed them to ask if they know)

Driving without a licence
This is a strange little offence. You would assume that its really serious and would lead to a ban, but it doesn't ! Having said that any offence that carries penalty points has to be taken very seriously...

Driving without a licence is not the same as driving whilst disqualified, which carries a significant risk of imprisonment because you are classed as ignoring an order of the court.

You can commit an offence of driving without a licence in a variety of different circumstances some of which are endorseable with 3 penalty points and some versions of the offence carry no points.

Endorseable Offences.

Driving without a licence is endorseable if you have no entitlement to drive the type of vehicle that you are driving. For example driving a manual car when you have never passed a manual car driving test. This offence carries 3 points.

Driving a motorbike without ever having passed a full test and without a motorbike entitlement is endorseable with 3 penalty points.

Driving without L plates and without a qualified supervisor is endorseable with 3 penalty points if you have never passed a full test and only have a provisional licence.

Non-Endorseable

Driving without a licence is not endorseable if you have passed the required test and you have an entitlement to driving the vehicle in question but for some reason your licence has been revoked or suspended.

This sometime happens if you have been convicted of an endorseable offence without knowing about it and the DVLA have been trying to get hold of you in order ot endorse points on it. If you don't respond to their letters they will revoke/suspend your licence whilst waiting for you to surrender it.

In order to get your licence back you simply have to surrender your licence to the DVLA.

http://www.pattersonlaw.co.uk/Driving-without-a-licence.php

[lookfar]

Wow, that's a bit of an eye opener - I thought it was much more serious than that!! Very interesting.

How do they give you points though if you don't actually have a licence in the first place?

[asky]

Driving without a licence normally gets you done for no insurance as well

asky

[britishnick]

Driving without a licence normally gets you done for no insurance as well

asky

yeah I noticed that - depends on the small print of your insurance, but I assume most will require you to have a licence.

2 points on that though :

Where's the law that requires someone to have a insurance to drive a private car on public roads. (and what is 'insurance'?)
I seem to recall National Insurance covering any 'clean up' operation. plus couldnt you pay for any damages cause yourself?

[britishnick]

Wow, that's a bit of an eye opener - I thought it was much more serious than that!! Very interesting.

How do they give you points though if you don't actually have a licence in the first place?

I wondered this too... I assume the points would only be added if you appolied for a licence. there's still the fine though.

[rob menard]

In order to get your licence back you simply have to surrender your licence to the DVLA.

That made me spew my coffee!

[britishnick]

I've go this initial reply from a solicitor:

"There is an offence of driving not in accordance with a licence. It normally
applies if you haven't passed a test or you are a learner driving without
supervision or l plates.

It carries 3 points and sometime the police will suggest your insurance is
invalidated which carries 6-8 points."

I have asked for clarification.

[yozhik]

So let me get this straight ...

If I am travelling without a licence ... then the penalty is points on the non-existant licence ... and a man in uniform might give me his opinion that my insurance might not be valid?

Points that mean nothing and a scary opinion?

I get worse than that from my wife for leaving socks on the floor!

[girlgye]

yes had a chat with nick and he is called nick and he is british but he's not nick griffin. :D
There that's a relief.

[britishnick]

deleted by 'Britishnick' cos it's not relevant to topic

[britishnick]

"you have to pass a recognised test otherwsie you commit an offence under s.89 RTA 1988"

This is my attempt and comprehending that part:

Section 89 refers to:
Who won't be granted a licence, (parts (1) and (2)
How the test is conducted (3)
the price of the test and re-tests (4)
proof of results of a test (5)
the difference in types of vehicles a test may relate to (6) and (7)
licences issued abroad (8)
licences issued abroad relating to different licence catgories (9)

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880052_en_8

still nothing I can see that clearly states anyone is REQUIRED to have a licence

Here's the part of the act refered to:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880052_en_8

89 Tests of competence to drive

(1) A licence authorising the driving of motor vehicles of any class shall not be granted to any person unless he satisfies the Secretary of State—

(a) that at some time during the period of ten years ending on the date of the coming into force of the licence applied for he has passed the test of competence to drive prescribed by virtue of subsection (3) below or a test of competence which under subsection (6) below is a sufficient test, or

(b) that within that period of ten years he has held a licence authorising the driving of vehicles of that class, not being a provisional licence, a licence granted by virtue of section 99(4) of the [1960 c. 16.] Road Traffic Act 1960 or a licence which has been revoked in pursuance of section 99(3) of this Act, or

(c) that, at the time of application for the licence—

(i) he holds an exchangeable licence authorising the driving of vehicles of a category corresponding to that class, and

(ii) he is normally resident in Great Britain or (where the exchangeable licence is a Community licence) the United Kingdom but has not been so resident for more than one year, or

(d) that—

(i) within that period of ten years he has held a licence granted under a relevant external law to drive vehicles of that class, not being a licence corresponding to a provisional licence or a licence granted under any provision of that law corresponding to section 99(4) of the [1960 c. 16.] Road Traffic Act 1960, and

(ii) he is not, at the time of application for the licence, disqualified under that law for holding or obtaining a licence under it to drive vehicles of any class.

This subsection is subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act as to provisional licences and to the provisions of any regulations made by virtue of section 105(2)(f) of this Act.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(d) above “relevant external law” means the law for the time being in force in Northern Ireland, that for the time being in force in the Isle of Man or that for the time being in force in any of the Channel Islands that corresponds to this Part of this Act.

(3) Regulations may make provision with respect to—

(a) the nature of tests of competence to drive for the purposes of this section,

(b) the qualifications, selection and appointment of persons by whom they may be conducted and the revocation of any appointment,

(c) evidence of the results of such tests,

and generally with respect to such tests.

(4) In particular, regulations may, without prejudice to the generality of subsection (3) above, provide—

(a) for requiring a person submitting himself for a test to provide a vehicle for the purposes of the test,

(b) for requiring a fee, of such amount as may be specified in the regulations or, in such cases as may be prescribed, specified by such person as may be prescribed, to be paid by a person who submits himself for a test or applies for an appointment for a test,

(c) for ensuring that a person submitting himself for a test and failing to pass that test shall not be eligible to submit himself for another test by the same or any other person before the expiration of a period specified in the regulations, except under an order made by a court or sheriff under the power conferred by section 90 of this Act,

and different regulations may be made with respect to tests of competence to drive different classes of vehicles.

(5) If regulations make provision for a test of competence to drive to consist of separate parts, they may make for each part—

(a) any provision that could be made for a test not consisting of separate parts, and

(b) provision for the supply by the Secretary of State of forms for certificates evidencing the results and for charges to be made for the supply.

(6) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) above, a test of competence shall be sufficient for the granting of a licence authorising the driving of—

(a) vehicles of any class, if at the time the test was passed it authorised the granting of a licence to drive vehicles of that class,

(b) vehicles of any classes which are designated by regulations as a group for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) above, if at the time the test was passed it authorised the granting of a licence to drive vehicles of any class included in the group.

(7) If vehicles of any classes are designated by regulations as a group for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above, a licence authorising the driving of vehicles of a class included in the group shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) to authorise the driving of vehicles of all classes included in the group.

The reference in this subsection to a licence does not include a licence which has been revoked in pursuance of section 99(3) of this Act.

(8) For the purposes of this section and section 88(1) of this Act, an exchangeable licence issued in respect of a member State, country or territory shall not be treated as authorising a person to drive a vehicle of any category if—

(a) the licence is not for the time being valid for that purpose, or

(b) it was issued in respect of that category for a purpose corresponding to that mentioned in section 97(2) of this Act.

(9) Where an exchangeable licence authorises the driving of vehicles of any category and any vehicle falling within that category falls also within any of the classes designated as a group for the purposes of subsection (1)(a) above—

(a) that category shall be treated for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above as corresponding to all classes included in the group, and

(b) where, by virtue of regulations, a person who passes a test of competence authorising the granting of a licence to drive vehicles of any class included in the group is treated as competent also to drive vehicles of a class included in another group, that category shall be treated for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above as corresponding to all categories included in that other group.

[picha]

Driving without a licence normally gets you done for no insurance as well

asky

You seem to have an in depth knowledge of police procedure asky. Is it because you are one?

[number_6]

2 points on that though :
[LIST]
Where's the law that requires someone to have a insurance to drive a private car on public roads. (and what is 'insurance'?)

RTA 1988 Part VI (143)


I seem to recall National Insurance covering any 'clean up' operation. plus couldnt you pay for any damages cause yourself?


No, you cannot pay yourself. However there was an ammendment in the RTA 1991 where you may deposit £500,000 with the Account general of the Supreme Court and no insurance is required. This ammendendment was to increase the £15,000 that was required in the RTA 1988.

[red_ram]

The only thing that annoys me about the concept of a driving licence is the money I have to shell out for it.

Apart from that, I'm happy to have one in exchange for the right to drive on British roads. Because when you have control over such a potentially dangerous machine, you need to know who is skilled and trained enough to use it safely, and stop those who aren't from getting behind the wheel.

[asky]

red ram wrote
The only thing that annoys me about the concept of a driving licence is the money I have to shell out for it.

you will go far on this forum :)

asky

[sindakit]

I just called the DVLA to ask if there is a statute or law that requires me to apply for a licence to drive a private automobile. The lady didn;t know, but suggested I look at the road traffic act 1988, which I did but it's huge.

quick google, this came up: (I emailed them to ask if they know)

Driving without a licence
This is a strange little offence. You would assume that its really serious and would lead to a ban, but it doesn't ! Having said that any offence that carries penalty points has to be taken very seriously...

Driving without a licence is not the same as driving whilst disqualified, which carries a significant risk of imprisonment because you are classed as ignoring an order of the court.

You can commit an offence of driving without a licence in a variety of different circumstances some of which are endorseable with 3 penalty points and some versions of the offence carry no points.

Endorseable Offences.

Driving without a licence is endorseable if you have no entitlement to drive the type of vehicle that you are driving. For example driving a manual car when you have never passed a manual car driving test. This offence carries 3 points.

Driving a motorbike without ever having passed a full test and without a motorbike entitlement is endorseable with 3 penalty points.

Driving without L plates and without a qualified supervisor is endorseable with 3 penalty points if you have never passed a full test and only have a provisional licence.

Non-Endorseable

Driving without a licence is not endorseable if you have passed the required test and you have an entitlement to driving the vehicle in question but for some reason your licence has been revoked or suspended.

This sometime happens if you have been convicted of an endorseable offence without knowing about it and the DVLA have been trying to get hold of you in order ot endorse points on it. If you don't respond to their letters they will revoke/suspend your licence whilst waiting for you to surrender it.

In order to get your licence back you simply have to surrender your licence to the DVLA.

http://www.pattersonlaw.co.uk/Driving-without-a-licence.php

Is it possible to revoke the licence yourself? I understnad having a right to travel should mean there is no need for a licence but perhaps there is anotehr way.

[britishnick]

So havin gbeen told by the solicitor that its in the RTA 1988, I read it, responded with my understanding of it (which I assume must have been correct)
- because I then got this reply:

"...of course you have to have a licence to drive a motor vehicle on a public road. Its a matter of public knowledge - otherwise why would people bother taking a test.

The rules about having to pass a test are contained in the Motor Vehicles (driving licences) Regulations."

which I think are Here:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1996/Uksi_19962824_en_1.htm

and here (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=3&parentActiveTextDocId=3234528&activetextdocid=3234573)

and then there's a rediculous number of them here:
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/SearchResults.aspx?TYPE=QS&Title=Motor+Vehicles+%28driving+licences%29+Regula tions&Year=&Number=&LegType=All+Legislation

Might be easier to ask a traffic cop?

I'll have a search around later, but if anyone else can find it :)

[britishnick]

Finally - Here's the part of the act that makes it an 'offence' to drive a motor vehicle without a licence:

Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52)
87 Drivers of motor vehicles to have driving licences

(1) It is an offence for a person to drive on a road a motor vehicle of any class if he is not the holder of a licence authorising him to drive a motor vehicle of that class.

(2) It is an offence for a person to cause or permit another person to drive on a road a motor vehicle of any class if that other person is not the holder of a licence authorising him to drive a motor vehicle of that class.

Still requires my consent though ;o) I'm working ont that part.

Interesting side note - free legal dictionary says:
motor vehicle n
(Engineering / Automotive Engineering) a road vehicle driven by a motor or engine, esp an internal-combustion engine.

So I don't drive the vehicle, the engine does that! I wonder if the engine should have a licence and not me? hehe

[Ian2day]

Finally - Here's the part of the act that makes it an 'offence' to drive a motor vehicle without a licence:

Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52)
87 Drivers of motor vehicles to have driving licences

(1) It is an offence for a person todrive on a road a motor vehicle of any class if he is not the holder of a licence authorising him to drive a motor vehicle of that class.

(2) It is an offence for a person to cause or permit another person to drive on a road a motor vehicle of any class if that other person is not the holder of a licence authorising him to drive a motor vehicle of that class.

Still requires my consent though ;o) I'm working ont that part.

Interesting side note - free legal dictionary says:
motor vehicle n
(Engineering / Automotive Engineering) a road vehicle driven by a motor or engine, esp an internal-combustion engine.

So I don't drive the vehicle, the engine does that! I wonder if the engine should have a licence and not me? hehe


Its an Act. So it is pretending to be something else. Parliament is a stage putting on a show. Its a pantomine full of fall guys, that we can all throw custerd pies at, from time to time. Whenever we get pissed off with it all. It is a diversion, put in place, to obfuscate the truth of reality.

Now go and look up the definition of person. See that it is a ficticious entity, created to CONtrol and oppress Men from being Free.

As well as to drive. This is to engage in commerce for reward or something similer. I cant remember exactly how things have been hidden.

There are other threads if you look far enough back that cover a lot of this subject. It may assist you and others in figuring it out.

[girlgye]

Hi Ian.
You sounding more like us in every way. :)

[merlincove]

i was caught about 20 years ago, driving without a licence. i got nine points for having no insurance (i was young and doing the rebel thing) and nothing for having no licence.

again, it is the insurance thing that gets ya every time.

[merlincove]

yeah I noticed that - depends on the small print of your insurance, but I assume most will require you to have a licence.

2 points on that though :

Where's the law that requires someone to have a insurance to drive a private car on public roads. (and what is 'insurance'?)
I seem to recall National Insurance covering any 'clean up' operation. plus couldnt you pay for any damages cause yourself?


i have been looking into extending third party liability insurance to cover a private automobile, but as yet i have not found anything significant - though i will approach lloyds at some point, but i don't think that an individual can ring them and discuss such directly, you have to go through an agent / broker.

Looking at approaching lloyds directly as a human being not wanting to contract with a third party doesn't seem to cut it. :confused:

[merlincove]

So let me get this straight ...

If I am travelling without a licence ... then the penalty is points on the non-existant licence ... and a man in uniform might give me his opinion that my insurance might not be valid?

Points that mean nothing and a scary opinion?

I get worse than that from my wife for leaving socks on the floor!

hehe

but going by the ~OP. if a test has been passed, and then the licence surrendered as per freeman right to free travel without let, hinderance or licence, then the freeman can not be prosecuted for h=not having a licence because s/he has passed the relevant tests :D

am i reading that correctly?

[chateaux]

Dont have a government issued license, DO have a SOCIETY issued one... cops just wave me on, works perfectly as ID and other things. Who the heck needs gov issued documents anyway???

At this point they need to prove I am obliged to have a gov issued license... hard to do as they ave to prove I am obliged to own a gov issued name.

Recently had to use my 'ID' to sign up for something... my id number did not fit the 'box' purposely created this way... so they where forced to enter me as "international"... Collecting some registered items... again the poor lady was writing my very long id number all up and down the page. Very funny! My friends where killing themselves afterward.

Now who said this zoo we live in is not fun?

And just by the way for you cynics out there... the ID is a contract... they are agreeing to contract with the terms and conditions as stipulated on the document. :D

So whats the name of your society???

[macneil]

3 points and a fine for no license and if you've no license you've no insurance so another 3 points and a fine, if you've no tax, that's another 3 and a fine... depending on the circumstances can be a ban if it goes to court regardless if you have a license or not. If your on a learner or provisional license 6 points is an automatic ban. If doing the same while under a ban, you'll get a sentence....

A good few years back I manged to get all 12 :D not in the above circumstances tho... bikes are a great way to get points. And if you loose your license on a bike you've lost your car, HGV etc as it's the same license.

[chateaux]

Fortunately - with my system, I don't fit into their system and am considered to be from a foreign jurisdiction (which it is). No points, no fines, no road tax... just peace.

[yozhik]

i was caught about 20 years ago, driving without a licence. i got nine points for having no insurance (i was young and doing the rebel thing) and nothing for having no licence.

again, it is the insurance thing that gets ya every time.

Errr ... 9 points on what?

9 points on a non-existent licence?

:D

It's like having 9 Peter Pan points added to your shadow for leering at Tinkerbell.

[asky]

chateaux
You make some bold statements about not carrying licences and police "waving you on"
Where do you live?

Just read an old post of yours and it says South Africa.
Is that still the case and if so where abouts?

asky

[girlgye]

Fortunately - with my system, I don't fit into their system and am considered to be from a foreign jurisdiction (which it is). No points, no fines, no road tax... just peace.

Where do you live Chateux?

[number_6]

So whats the name of your society???

What's the name of yours?

[rob menard]

WOW Blatant and obvious avoidance.

to answer anyway: World Freeman Society.

Now :What is the name of yours?

Can't name it can you?

hahahahahahahahahaha
You have an imaginary society you have not even bothered to give an imaginary name!

[number_6]

WOW Blatant and obvious avoidance.

to answer anyway: World Freeman Society.

I see. chateaux is a member of your club?
How many members exactly have you in your society?


Now :What is the name of yours?

Can't name it can you?

rob I have already told you the uk population as a society does not have a name, do you think it should? You see we are a collection of many millions of individuals, it would be difficult to put a name on it, as it would by definition limit it's potential. Do you dismiss the UK population of many millions as non existant that do not belong to the WFS?
Exactly how many members does the WFS have?


hahahahahahahahahaha
You have an imaginary society you have not even bothered to give an imaginary name!

It is really quaint how you claim a collection of people do not exist.
Do you deny the existence of all societies that have no name?
You are correct, rob. We really don't want imaginary names, so we don't bother to label ourselves.
Oh, exactly how many members does the WFS have?

[rob menard]

1- None of your business is it?

2- If it does not have a name it does not legally exist. A collection of people is not a society in the absence of mutual consent. Existence in a geographical area does not constitute consent to be governed by someone else in that same location.

3- I do not claim that the people do not exist. I claim they are not operating as a legal society and the lack of name is prima facie evidence of that.

Again, how many members in the WFS is none of your business.

[freemanpete]

WOW Blatant and obvious avoidance.

to answer anyway: World Freeman Society.

Now :What is the name of yours?

Can't name it can you?

hahahahahahahahahaha
You have an imaginary society you have not even bothered to give an imaginary name!

Ha hahaha,
It's like a Bar I was sitting in once in Kuala Lumpur. It was the Reggae Bar and on the wall from top to bottom was graffiti from people all over the world.

One jumped out at me and sunk in....

Religious Wars, and that is 95% of all Wars, are simple arguments over who has the best imaginary friend.

Hey Peeps. If you find yourself down the library one day.. Maybe you took a wrong turn. Go in and see if there is a book in there called "Watson's Dictionary of Weasel Words"
Very enlightening and an amusing read.

[number_6]

Again, how many members in the WFS is none of your business.

Is it a secret?

I would wager there are more in our society without a name than there is in yours.

[asky]

They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations.
There is no such thing as society. There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.

two famous quotes does anyone agree?

asky

[the worm that turned]

two famous quotes does anyone agree?

asky

Famous?? Not sure about that. What's your point?

[asky]

Do you agree with them?

asky

[the worm that turned]

Do you agree with them?

asky

Not entirely

[asky]

They are attributed to Margret Thatcher ;)

asky