Sigh.
Just had a call from the insurance company.
They 'just noticed' that I put in an email too, about needing documents, and therefore need 'coverage' for Sunday.
The bit of paper they posted this morning would have been from Tuesday, rather than backdated.
So I've arranged for a fax copy tomorrow, and it sent out by 'special delivery' for by midday thursday.
So regarding preparation for Maelstrom, I'm still going to be helping, but I'm _not_ going to be leaving the house before that piece of paper arrives...
(Unless the fax arrives wednesday, and proves acceptable).
Failing that, well I guess I just get to go ask for an extension.
(*mutters about insurance schedule not being enough proof of cover*)
Edit: Just found this article from the BBC. Scroll down a bit, and have a look at the 'average fine' for driving without insurance... No wonder people do it - I'd have to get nicked 6 times a year (ok under the assumption that I got 'average' each time, and didn't lose my license) in order to pay the same amount as my insurance is currently.
Just had a call from the insurance company.
They 'just noticed' that I put in an email too, about needing documents, and therefore need 'coverage' for Sunday.
The bit of paper they posted this morning would have been from Tuesday, rather than backdated.
So I've arranged for a fax copy tomorrow, and it sent out by 'special delivery' for by midday thursday.
So regarding preparation for Maelstrom, I'm still going to be helping, but I'm _not_ going to be leaving the house before that piece of paper arrives...
(Unless the fax arrives wednesday, and proves acceptable).
Failing that, well I guess I just get to go ask for an extension.
(*mutters about insurance schedule not being enough proof of cover*)
Edit: Just found this article from the BBC. Scroll down a bit, and have a look at the 'average fine' for driving without insurance... No wonder people do it - I'd have to get nicked 6 times a year (ok under the assumption that I got 'average' each time, and didn't lose my license) in order to pay the same amount as my insurance is currently.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 08:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 09:17 am (UTC)The legal requirement in the UK is for third party that _only_ covers the person you run into/over.
So if you were feeling callous you could run without on the assumption that you wouldn't see the benefit, and the Government would pay up.
And given the difference in premium vs. fine, I can see why people take that choice.
Personally, I've been running with fully comprehensive insurance since the difference between that and third party dropped to below a few hundred - at the end of the day, I simply cannot afford to be without a car or drivers license.
and the Government would pay up
Date: 2004-09-14 10:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 12:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 01:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 06:17 pm (UTC)