Roymondo:
Conor:
You have to remember that it isn’t actually a requirement of the Police to know all of the law. It seems in this case that the police the OP has dealt with don’t know of the exemption in liability built into the RTA for employees driving a company vehicle.
I would point that part shown out to them. If they want to let it proceed then when you get to court you just bring a copy of the RTA, your wageslips, point out the part of the RTA and that you were driving the vehicle in course of your duties as an employee.
It’s not an exemption from liability, it’s a statutory defence. As per the extracts quoted by others, it is down to the driver to show that it applies to him. The only practicable way he can do this is to answer questions (which, due to current rules on questioning of people supected of offences, must be done under caution).
The alternative of course is to follow the advice of the barrack-room lawyers hereabouts and decline to be interviewed or go “no comment” to everything. Then you get to take a day off work appear in court in person, plead Not Guilty and (hopefully) prove to the court that the defence applies in your case before walking out a free man and wondering why you didn’t simply answer the questions to start with.
Roymundo, Insurance is a straight foreward you’ve got it yes or no . Of course we do not have all the facts here, but even from what the OP tells us, its not straightforeward. IF he’d of been stopped with no insurance, culpable or not, the vehicle would be stopped, impounded, prohibited or whatever. BUt apparently, or lack of suggestion of otherwise i’m assuming the vehicle is free. Its gone through two police forces so far,the OP says Dover police has handed info over to Kent Police. Hard to guess how that situation has arisen.
The OP also says…
had a visit from the local police about insurance for a truck I was driving before xmas
So they’ve spoken to him. Whatever he has or has not said, apparently has not cleared up the matter as they now want a statement, for use in court. As lets face it, they don’t want a statement in writing and signed just so they can put the matter officially to bed, agreed ?
Now you say don’t listen to “barrack room lawyers” who say…say nowt, don’t give an interview etc…(i’m one of them offering that advice 
). But here’s the facts so far, he’s held an insurance policy that he has seen and used abroad where it a pre requsite for travel. I’m guessing if he’s told us here that, he’s also told the Police that? But better than that, the Police Federation/Union whatever it is, can you guess what advice it gives its members (Policemen) if they are questioned for some alleged misdemeanour ? I’ll make it multiple choice for you so its easier to answer,…
(a) do they tell members to assist the enquiry by answering all questions related to their duty and conduct?
or do they tell their members to …
(b) Say nothing at all until you have Legal representation with you, and even then try to refrain from making any statement ?
What do the Police advise their own members to do when faced with a Police Inquiry, a or b ?
But back to the OP, it should be pretty simple. Decline any interview, accertain what it is they want to speak about, i.e…No Insurance. Tell them simply, with no interview…I held it, i seen the policy, i carried it. End of story. Nothing signed, let them do there own homework, which i’d suspect goes well beyond the realms of if the driver was insured or not. But convicting the driver of no insurance, which may be seen as an easy targett may prop up whatever else it is they’re doing. They’re not going to lay the cards on the table to him are they? And neither should he lay his.
Oh, and as to your assumption that he’d have to take a day off to attend a Court case, thats not true. He’d simply write a letter to the CPS or whoever is handling the prosecution, and state what he intends to use as a defence and it’ll be withdrawn. They will not continue a case a prosecuting an employed driver for no insurance if he has told that he has held and seen the Policy and had no reason to believe everything was not in order. So, no day off in Court.
I speak from personal experience in this area, lots, not theory.
