Islington police seized a McLaren MP4 valued at a £170,000 on Thursday, November 14 after it was involved in a collision with a cyclist.
The cyclist, a 41-year-old man, was taken to a north London hospital with minor injuries.
The vehicle was seized by police as the driver, a 63-year-old man, did not have the appropriate insurance.
The incident happened just before midday in Old Srtreet at the junction with Mallow Street.
There were no arrests.
If the driver decides he doesn’t want his car back, it may be auctioned off.
Earlier this year, a Lamborghini Aventador valued at £300,000 was confiscated in Newham, east London after police found the driver had insufficient insurance.
The driver failed to come forward after police confiscated the car and it was sold for £218,000. The money was put into frontline policing.
28 thoughts on “Police confiscate £170,000 McLaren after driver hits cyclist”
And they say cyclists should
And they say cyclists should be insured?
8|
can you get a bike carrier on
can you get a bike carrier on that? If so I’ll have it.
timothy wrote:can you get a
Problem is that the “rules” state that if you must put a bike on a car it must be worth more than the car !!
So you can drive uninsured
So you can drive uninsured and hit someone and not be arrested or charged?
Arrest is a final option for
Arrest is a final option for police. The driver if he doesn’t have insurance will be reported for summons. Committing an offence is not an automatic reason to arrest someone. He will most likely be interviewed under caution for hitting the cyclist and reported for summons for that too if appropriate. ( careless or inconsiderate, or driving without due care and attention ). Just because it’s not in the article doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened. But it hardly creates headlines.
Sswindells wrote:Arrest is a
“There were no arrests.”
northstar wrote:Sswindells
I think what Sswindells is saying that just because there were no arrests does not mean that there will be no charges.
sponican wrote:northstar
I think what Sswindells is saying that just because there were no arrests does not mean that there will be no charges.— Sswindells
I know that, still find it bizarre why a driver who has struck another road user with a motor vehicle is not arrested.
northstar wrote:sponican
I think what Sswindells is saying that just because there were no arrests does not mean that there will be no charges.— northstar
I know that, still find it bizarre why a driver who has struck another road user with a motor vehicle is not arrested.— Sswindells
Because there still needs to be a necessity to arrest otherwise it will be unlawful. What you have to ask yourself is “what are hoping to achieve from the investigation by making an arrest?” Such things could be obtaining bodily samples or a house search for instance. The necessity criteria are laid down here
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/24
in section 24(5).
StoopidUserName wrote:So you
Yup, it seems that way.
Isn’t it a McLaren, not
Isn’t it a McLaren, not Maclaren.
another twat with too much
another twat with too much money and not enough sense ..
Karbon Kev wrote:another twat
Twat, perhaps. You don’t know the circumstances. No sense, unarguably.
Too much money? That’s just envy/jealousy. I’d have that car in a flash. And at least it is designed, engineered and mostly built by a British company, in Britain. So the £200k it cost new has gone into the British economy…
Interesting place for the accident, I know the location well. Was the car pulling out of Mallow Street or into the Shell station I wonder…
Twat, perhaps. You don’t know
He’s not a twat for driving a McLaren – that’s a fine car. Perhaps not ideally suited for driving in central London, but that’s a different matter.
He’s a twat for driving without insurance.
Car insurance is not as
Car insurance is not as simple as some people imagine.
If you can PERSONALLY guarantee £0.5M you don’t need to purchase insurance from a 3rd party insurer.
Many of these supercars in West London are driven by Arabs who are more than capable of self insuring.
Agreed, I used to have an IBM
Agreed, I used to have an IBM company car that was ‘underwritten’ rather than insured.
I object to the proceeds
I object to the proceeds going to the police, this type of funding is not generally done for good reason. The money should go to the exchequer and help to pay off the national debt.
That is a punishment that
That is a punishment that will actually sting. A lot better than just community service
You dont arrest for no
You dont arrest for no insurance, like Sswindells stated, unless you fail to provide your details (so no summons or ticket can be issued) or in certain cases where you are a foreign national and the issue of a summons or ticket is not appropriate (for instance a foreign lorry driver who is in the country to drop off or pick up a load)
Some people must think if your not arrested you dont go to court. There really are some thick people on this forum at times.
Let’s hope they chuck the
Let’s hope they chuck the book at him. Sell his car and sponsor the cyclist in suing him for damages. I would!
Also in the Road CC story it
Also in the Road CC story it states ” did not have the appropriate insurance.”
Not “no insurance”
willdeath wrote:Also in the
Isn’t that the same thing? I’m fairly sure the insurance company would refuse to pay out if the insurance did not cover the driver.
Teach him a lesson, where is
Teach him a lesson, where is my tank…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ-8xj8CUZw
Difficult to say what would
Difficult to say what would happen on the insurance / civil liability side of things. But there’s three ways it could turn out:
* The insurer of the vehicle deals with third party losses on a discretionary basis
* If the driver has valid comprehensive insurance, his insurer may deal with third party losses under the Driving Other Vehicles bit of his third party liability cover
* no valid insurance is in place on either the car or the driver, or the vehicle’s insurer declines to deal on a discretionary basis – off the Milton Keynes to make a claim against the Motor Insurers’ Bureau
But in any event, the damage to the vehicle is not covered. This is assuming the driver was at fault, but he’s likely to be in deep crap anyway, probably facing a wodge of points on his licence and substantial increases in costs of insurance in the future.
Does anyone have any ideas that help a driver in this unfortunate situation?… 👿
Driver hits cyclist
Driver
Driver hits cyclist
Driver has no insurance
Car seized and flogged for £220K
£220K funds more coppers stopping cyclists without lids.
Hmm.
gazza_d wrote:Driver hits
I don’t think they have sold the McLaren. The article talks about a Lamborghini which was seized and sold because the owner couldn’t produce insurance. I guess that may happen in the case of the McLaren, but that will depend on what the owner does.
They should put the car in
They should put the car in the crusher
abbeybob wrote:They should
Why? Strange response.