Pensioner got one letter wrong in car insurance application

The woman in her 80s paid for a year’s cover for her Suzuki Splash car with Swinton Insurance and believed she was complying with the law.

But at a court hearing where she was not present and not represented by a lawyer, she was convicted of keeping a car without insurance because she had accidentally written an F instead of an S when including her car registration number on her insurance application.

That meant the insurance was technically invalid for her car.

The pensioner realised the error after she received a letter from the DVLA saying she was being criminally prosecuted for keeping a vehicle without insurance.

The octogenarian wrote to magistrates setting out the mistake, while her niece also penned a letter explaining that the family was now stepping in to help as they “did not know it had got to the stage where she can’t cope”.

Despite the letters, the pensioner was still convicted of a crime in the Single Justice Procedure, a controversial fast-track court process where magistrates hand out convictions and punishments in private hearings.

After the Press Association highlighted the case to the DVLA, the agency said it will now contact the woman to check her insurance paperwork and will seek to have the conviction overturned if the registration typo was indeed to blame.

The pensioner faced prosecution after it was said her car was uninsured on February 6 2026.

Replying to the Single Justice Procedure notice, she wrote: “I understood my car was fully insured with Swinton Insurance, from April 1 2025 to March 31 2026.

“I did not notice the registration printed wrongly.

“Had an F instead of an S.”

Her niece also sent in a letter, explaining: “All the paperwork for insurance has been found to be one letter incorrect.

“No-one had picked up on this.

“I am now helping her with her paperwork as we (the family) did not know it had got to the stage where she can’t cope.

“She has tried to complete the form as best as possible.”

The Single Justice Procedure was invented in 2015 as a cheaper way of handling low-level criminal cases, allowing a magistrate sitting alone in private to take decisions instead of three magistrates deliberating together in open court.

Cases are decided based on written evidence alone, and there is no prosecutor present to see the mitigation and other correspondence sent in by the defendant.

The design of the fast-track process means prosecutors are unable to review new evidence that has come to light, or take a decision to withdraw a case that is no longer in the public interest.

Teesside Magistrates’ Court (Image: NORTHERN ECHO)

In the pensioner’s case, David Pollard, a magistrate sitting at Teesside Magistrates’ Court, opted to accept the written guilty plea and impose a conviction, rather than asking the DVLA to do further checks on the public interest in the prosecution.

He sentenced her to a three-month conditional discharge instead of a fine, but also ordered her to pay a £26 victim surcharge.

The Labour Government conducted a consultation on possible changes to the Single Justice Procedure system between March and May last year, after a string of media revelations about harsh convictions and injustices involving elderly and vulnerable people.

No plan for change has emerged since the end of the consultation nearly a year ago.

However the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr revealed at her annual press conference in March that Lord Justice Green, the Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales, is leading a “nuts and bolts audit” of the Single Justice Procedure.

A working group, comprising of judges, magistrates, and justice officials, “will soon conclude” the audit, the Judicial Office said, with recommendations set to go to the Interim Magistrates Executive Board.