Pensioner with dementia convicted over unpaid car insurance despite not being able to drive
A 77-year-old man with severe dementia was convicted in a controversial fast-track court process for failing to insure a car he could no longer drive.
The pensioner stopped driving his Peugeot in December 2024, the same month he received a diagnosis of dementia from doctors.
Court documents show the man is now “confused most of the time” and unable to manage his own affairs.
It was reported that he had no information about receiving a penalty from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) in relation to an uninsured vehicle in August last year. His brother was only alerted to the escalating problem after the DVLA opted to launch criminal proceedings earlier this month, prompting him to send a letter to the court detailing the circumstances behind the unpaid bill.
But his letter was not enough to stop the prosecution and a judge in Derby last Thursday found the man guilty of possessing a motor vehicle that did not meet insurance requirements.
The claim was filed under the Single Justice Procedure (SJP), a fast-track court process where judges sit specifically to deal with low-level criminal cases quickly.
Invented as a cost-cutting measure in 2015, the design of the SJP system means that prosecutors such as the DVLA do not see the letters defendants submit to the court.
The chance to withdraw cases that are no longer in the public interest is constantly missed.
In the retiree’s case, a lawsuit was filed against him on August 12 last year because his car was not insured.
“(He is) a 77-year-old retiree with severe dementia,” the brother wrote.
“The disease became widespread in the second half of 2024.
“He was officially diagnosed in December 2024. From then on he was advised not to drive.
“It was agreed that I would purchase the vehicle from him in the spring of 2025. I also arranged for the vehicle to undergo a new inspection.”
He said his brother, who lives in Middleton, Greater Manchester, had not driven at all in 2025, but had mistakenly told a doctor during one of his medical assessments that he was “still driving”.
“The severity of dementia causes memory loss, which often leaves him confused,” Brother continued.
“He can’t run his business anymore and that’s why I just learned about this issue.
“(He) doesn’t remember receiving any letters about this.
“I am currently trying to obtain a Power of Attorney that will allow me to handle his affairs on his behalf.”
The DVLA served the pensioner with a fine notice last August and took action after the fine was not paid.
Judge Louise Hammond accepted the guilty plea made on his brother’s behalf and gave him a six-month conditional discharge instead of a fine.
The Single Justice Procedure is currently under review by the Labor Government due to complaints that it is overly secretive and mounting evidence that vulnerable people, sick pensioners and hospital patients are being unfairly convicted.
The Magistrates’ Association, the body that represents judges in England and Wales, said nearly two years ago that the system needed major reform and proposed a series of changes, including a requirement for prosecutors to look at mitigating letters before cases go to court.
The DVLA itself is on board with the idea and told ministers last spring it would support such a change.
The Government has stated that it is aware of concerns regarding the Single Justice Procedure and continues to consider responses to consultations on possible changes, which conclude in May 2025.
The DVLA says it is urging anyone who received a letter about the enforcement decision to “contact us if there are extenuating circumstances we should be aware of”.
When efforts to make contact and resolve issues out of court fail, he says, lawsuits will be filed.
The DVLA adds that it is currently up to judges to refer the letter of mitigation back to the prosecutor for public interest consideration.
Although a criminal complaint has been made and accepted by the court, it is clear that the DVLA will apply to the court to reopen the case.
