Free Traffic Legal Advice

Learner motorcyclists already have to complete Compulsory Basic Training before they can otherwise* ride on the road. This requirement is intended to mitigate the issue that learner riders do not have a supervisor sat immediately to their left, so they have to complete a basic training course to ensure a minimum level of competence in a sterile environment (a coned off car-park) before being assessed riding back to the training centre, and given a chit enabling them to ride on the road generally.

The Germans have a solution to some as yet unspecified problem. Being German it is probably very efficient. And expensive. Are supervised learner car drivers with little to no driving experience a significant problem? The obvious solution to the issue of learner car drivers starting off with little to no driving experience is to require them to display L plates and to be supervised by a qualified driver aged over 21 with at least 3 years driving experience sat in the front passenger seat, and able to grab the wheel, or otherwise take over the driving if it becomes necessary.

The solution of "more training" across the board, before the learner is allowed an opportunity to demonstrate whether he has reached the required level of competence would mostly only be a solution to a shortage of driving examiners/test appointments if the government itself had not reached any discernable level of competence.

*The CBT includes an element of road riding.

So, based on the photos, I can confidently state that you need to have a word with yourself.

The criteria for "last known address" is broadly whether the sender had reason to doubt that the address provided was still current, and then the practicalities of tracking down the current address.

On the face of it, it seems perverse that a notice sent to somewhere you haven't lived at for 2 years can be considered your "last known address" (presumably you haven't provided the identity thieves with an updated address...), but that is where the reasonably practicable defence comes in.

All cases are fact specific. Your account contains about as many facts as an answer in PMQs.
If others have been able to defend against allegations, it will almost certainly be due to the facts in their case.

From what I can gather from your timeline, you contacted Saga prior to the stated renewal date to reduce the cover level , which prompted  the "You're covered" email. I strongly suspect, having had insurance and observed the discrepancies between what they say and the facts* the "You're covered"
email is almost certainly system generated when a new cover commences - in this case your reduced cover, presumably for the remainder of the policy. I do not read it as indicating that the renewal, due to occur about 3 weeks later, had already been actioned.

I would say that you are generally entitled to take what they say at face value, rather that applying a cynical translation to mean something entirely different than what it says, but I, personally, would be minded to treat that as a side issue and not conflate it with the auto-renewal term, which on the face of it appears to extend the duration of the insurance contract indefinitely in 12 month chunks, subject to cancellation with notice from either party.


*A favourite being when, after cancelling the autorenewal that I never asked for of agreed to because I had found and accepted a cheaper quote, the policy expired, receiving a warning email to inform me that I was uninsured - which was a big fat lie, I was insured, just not with them.

If you want us to give up our free time to try to help you, I suggest that you provide some background/context to the case, rather than simply, "here's a link to the letter, kindly do the needful".

Laser speedmeters (Lidar) typical work by measuring the distance to the object through ~40 pulses over ~1/3 second. The distance(s) measured are the beam length from time of flight halved. 4 initial pulses will set the window for expected reflected pulses and the remainder (including the last of the 4 initial pulses) will be used to calculate the speed. Inconsistency will throw up an error.

"Slip" can be achieved by sliding the end of the beam along a smooth surface, such as the side of a lorry. If the device is clamped into position, slip would create a negative error - the lorry would be moving, but the length of the beam could remain constant. If the device is panned to track the vehicle, and the beam moves from the rear to the front of a length of smooth surface during that 1/3 second, it could add up to ~7mph per metre of slip (3m/s).