Originally Posted by Bulletguy1:
“I assumed you understood what i was referring to by the quote i posted from the DVLA website?”
I assumed you understood that the DVLA can only prosecute in respect of licencing offences and not road traffic accidents?
Originally Posted by Bulletguy1:
“ If referring to your opinion that 'if serious it would carry a more severe penalty than £1000 and 3-6 points,' i don't think you've even begun to grasp the consequences. Are you really so naive to believe that's where it begins and ends? It may well with the DVLA but anyone foolish enough to think that's the end of the matter had better think again. That's just for starters.”
But we're discussing what sanctions the DVLA can impose, no one else. Again, the Crown Office have determined he will not be prosecuted for the accident.
Originally Posted by Bulletguy1:
“Clarke lied to his employer, his GP and the DVLA. Whilst he would have been under GCC's company insurance which will be voided, he would also have car insurance which he's taken out himself. Given his now known history of lying, he's no doubt lied to them in order to get cover. They too will have voided his policy. They can, and still may, prosecute him for 'non-disclosure'. It's fraud and if caught out as Clarke has now been, will cost the perpetrator dearly.”
How many assumptions can you make in one paragraph?
Firstly you do realise that Glasgow City Council like most local authorities, police forces, fire services 'self insurer'? So there is no question of voiding a policy.
Secondly, assuming he does drive a private car and/or he is insured on one (which we don't know) then they may indeed void that insurance. But as there has been no claim on that policy why would they go to the extent of making a complaint to the police regarding fraud? Just because he was the bloke who drove the bin lorry that crashed?