UK Hearts Crushing Cars

uk hearts crushing cars

Money.net reports that various U.K. authorities have destroyed some 45k uninsured vehicles during the first nine months of '07. Which is OK with Nick Starling, director of general insurance at the Association of British Insurers. "These figures show that the determination of the insurance industry and the police to drive them [uninsured motorists] from our roads is beginning to bear fruit." The Manchester Evening News says their local constabulary can claim 10k of that total. "Since January 2006 we have seized more than 25,000 vehicles," boasts Sgt Mark Beales of the Greater Manchester Police's traffic section. "We will continue to ensure there is no hiding place for those who break the law." While the Association of British Drivers (ABD) doesn't dispute the police's right to confiscate uninsured motorists' vehicles, ABD Environment spokesman Ben Adams argues "This government is so venomously anti-car, that confiscated vehicles are thoughtlessly crushed out of sheer spite. They claim the environment to be their top priority yet it appears they are encouraging the mindless destruction of huge resources of used parts that could be recycled and destroying serviceable cars." Fair dues?

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 23 comments
  • RobbieWilliams RobbieWilliams on Jan 10, 2008

    Here are a few quick responses to some of previous postings 1. We are citizen subjects, and have every same right as other countries that have mere citizens. 2. Comparing this move to a Nazi tactic makes me wonder how closely people pay attention to history. 3. What is a worse crime, having the government seize your asset (after giving you fair and ample warning for failing to live up to the responsibilityone undertakes when purchasing a car) or driving around without insurance and potentially costing yourself or taxpayers huge expense in the event of an accident? As parents are so ready to inform young ones, driving is a privilege not a right.

  • Jazbo123 Jazbo123 on Jan 10, 2008
    "What is a worse crime, having the government seize your asset (after giving you fair and ample warning for failing to live up to the responsibilityone undertakes when purchasing a car) or driving around without insurance and potentially costing yourself or taxpayers huge expense in the event of an accident?" Definately, much worse for the govt to sieze your asset. Why? It doesn't belong to them. Of course private property rights have little meaning to marxists.

  • RobbieWilliams RobbieWilliams on Jan 10, 2008
    Definately, much worse for the govt to sieze your asset. Why? It doesn’t belong to them. Of course private property rights have little meaning to marxists. It does in fact belong to the government as that the person enters in to a contract once they purchase a car. They are required to maintain insurance as part of the operating cost of the vehicle and their driving privileges. As for them being marxist, this is simply not the case if one has read Marx and studied history.

  • 2ronnies1cup 2ronnies1cup on Jul 22, 2011

    *sigh* - The police don't just seize and crush your vehicle. If you are found to be driving w/o insurance, the vehicle is impounded. The driver must then take out insurance on the vehicle and pay a fee to redeem it from the pound. If the driver doesn't bother to do this, after a certain time the vehicle is considered abandoned, and disposed of by crushing, as are all vehicles abandoned in the pound. It's not very different from the system operated in many US States where vehicles without current tags are impounded and declared abandoned if the owner doesn't redeem them after a certain time. I believe that disposal by public auction is more usual than crushing in the US though.

Next