It has always struck me as unfair that, up to two years after a motoring conviction is “spent”, (meaning that it is no longer current for criminal law purposes) the motorist is penalised again by his insurance company.

For example, if you are caught speeding in a 30 mile an hour zone you will normally (depending on how far you exceeded the speed limit) receive a fine and a 3 point endorsement on your licence.

The endorsement is current for 3 years and if you accumulate a total of 12 points within that time you will face a ban. However, after 3 years the conviction is spent and has no relevance to any future legal proceedings and you can even apply to have it removed from your licence after 4 years. Why is it then that, at insurance renewal time, insurance companies always ask, not whether you have any current convictions, but whether you have had any convictions within the last 5 years?

This happened to me recently when I declared that I have a speeding conviction dating back to October 2010, just under 5 years ago. This conviction has been spent for nearly 2 years and in the eyes of the law has no relevance to any future offence that I may be stupid or careless enough to commit. Why should insurance companies be allowed to, in effect, treat the conviction as though it were still current and increase the insurance premium accordingly?

Frankly, this is nothing short of exploitation and extortion by insurance companies and it is surely time that action is taken by the financial authorities to curb their greed.