Where do I stand

[Most Easterly Pandas]

I know you were helping with your first post and am not disputing that its just that I'd never heard that but there is a first for everything.

So on that basis then why are people often done for no insurance on a front case for example where their insurer has ceased cover on the basis that the policy was gained through deception, if they have an obligation to provide that cover to 3rd partys?

I wasn't getting confused with what I said as under extended 3rd party liability if an insured driver and uninsured driver colide and its the fault of the insured driver the insurance company still have to put the uninsured party in the possition the were in before, even though they shouldn't have been on the road in the first place as they wernt insured to be there like the majority of people.

 

[usetherudders]

The problem that you have with fronting is that the misrepresentation only comes to light once an incident occurs.
There are many people driving around having misled their respective insurers and have a claim free year of driving.

Once a claim is made it's up to the insurer to make sure that all policy conditions are met in order to grant indemnity. If policy conditions haven't been met then the insurer is within their right to refuse indemnity and cancel the policy ab-initio.
If fraud can be proven then the insurer is entitled to retain any premium and not offer a refund.

Going back to my last post the insurer has a statutory obligation under the road traffic act. This is when the insurer will look to recover their outlay back.

Driving without insurance is a different matter all together. If you were fronting and took out a policy under false pretenses then as an example if you were stopped by the Police then a MID check would show that the vehicle was insured as opposed to driving around without insurance, this then becomes an offence.

With regard to your last point there is case law which states that if you collide with an uninsured vehicle then the responsible insurer is under no obligation to repair the vehicle as it had no right to be on the road in the first place.
The same would apply to any person who tried to claim injury as a passenger from an uninsured vehicle knowingly.

Hope this helps.