Does anyone watch it???
This week they stopped a guy in a Saab with no insurance, he said it was a mistake and he had another car with insurance that allowed him to drive any car
Oh no said the cop, it only allows you to drive if the car your driving also has insurance.
Does that make scence?
He got £200 fine and 6 points
Edited by Pugugly on 29/11/2009 at 18:08
|
|
Yes, that is correct, you can drive another car on your insurance (if your policy allows it of course !), but the car you are driving still has to be insured in its own right..
|
Yes that is correct you can drive another car on your insurance (if your policy allows it of course !) but the car you are driving still has to be insured in its own right..
No it doesn't. Unless the policy that you're relying on for cover states the other vehicle must be insured in its own right. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance policies normally state (amongst other things) that you can drive another car which doesn't belong to you.
|
Insurance policies normally state (amongst other things) that you can drive another car which doesn't belong to you.
Yep I remember a police-camera-action style programme where a young scroat was pulled over having picked up a new car a couple of weeks earlier.
The officer first establishes whether he owns the vehicle, then proceeds to explain that there is no insurance on it.
"But officer, the car IS insured - I have my documents to prove it". Officer points out that he "owns" the vehicle, and that the insurance certificate states clearly that only cars NOT belonging to the policyholder are covered... doh!
|
|
|
|
I watch it and have not seen that eposide. Indeed it just makes sense and I have just warned a friend last night about this. She is off to France for 6 months and thus canceling her car insurance, her dad is going to drive it round the block every so often. However the car itself won't be insured and her dad could get done for having no insurance.
My policy says I can drive any car with the owners permision providing the other car has insurance. This is useful for shunting puproses when I want to move my dads car out the way!
|
But is it not the driver that insured, if it is a car that is insured surly anyone can drive it as happens in some countries
How am I going to get my other car to the MOT station now ?????
|
|
It is both. The reason that rule exists is you could have one fully comp policy on a 1.2 Corsa, then buy a Ferrari and use your Corsa insurance to drive that. The entire system would be open to this sort of fraud.
|
OK so hypothetical question.....I let the insurance lapse on my "spare" car. I own it. My wife decides to drive it. She has fully comp insurance on her own separate car.
Is she legal ?
|
No.
I've never seen a policy which does not require that the vehicle is insured in its own right. Even then the 'other vehicle' cover is generally 3rd party risk only.
Check the terms of the policy.
|
|
Just curious really. Too old fashioned to risk it !
|
Too old fashioned to risk it !
And me!
|
|
|
|
Is she legal ?
Probably, but it depends on what her policy says.
Mine, with Liverpool Victoria, makes no mention of the driven car needing to have its own insurance. Indeed, even if the car was insured, such cover pointless while being driven by someone who isn't on the policy.
|
vehicle is insured in its own right
What is the exact meaning of this? I checked my policy document for Drive Other Car option but it does not mention that other vehicle needs to be insured in its own right.
In UK, usually a vehicle is insured for particular driver(s) only.
Those who are on motor trade are allowed to drive any cars. I don't think all cars they drive are also insured in their own right!
DOC part is very vague.
Police always go by MIB database which often lags by 48 hrs following any change in policy [eg. new/expired policy]
|
|
I checked my policy ( Norwich Union IIRC) for the DOC section and it makes no mention of the vehicle having to be insured, neither does SWMBO's ( Shiela's Wheels/ eSure), which is just as well as she drove my latest bangernomics Vectra home before I had chance to insure it.
|
|
|
DOC part is very vague.
DOC is vague and its misuse (it was only ever intended that it should used in an emergency, or perhaps for moving a car that was blocking you in at a party etc) led to pressure on insurance companies to remove it.
Some (I think noteably NU/Aviva) started to remove it but other companies refused, saying it could lead to customers being uninsured when they needed to drive other cars in an emergency. I gather NU/Aviva have put it back again.
|
It was always my understanding that the other "non owned" car had to be insured by another party
and indeed that usually one was only cover third party when driving under this provision
|
It was always my understanding that the other "non owned" car had to be insured by another party
>>
That's not correct, but some people say some policies require it. I've never seen one though.
and indeed that usually one was only cover third party when driving under this provision
It's always, as far as I know, 3rd party only.
|
It's always, as far as I know, 3rd party only.
If I drive someone else's car and leave it parked on the street or in a public place. Who insures it? A parked car need to be insured. If driving someone else's car 3rd party surely it ceases to be insured on your policy when you park it? And therefore it needs to be insured to be legal? It cannot be covered on your policy because that is protecting your car.
I always thought DOC * meant it still had to be insured.
* By DOC I mean drive other car and not a rating of wine quality. We do have some pedants here.
Edited by rtj70 on 29/11/2009 at 22:43
|
If driving someone else's car 3rd party surely it ceases to be insured on your policy when you park it?
There is a long standing court case precedent about this and the drivers insurance covers the car if the stop is incidental to the journey - stopping to pick something up, buying petrol etc.
Again, it's all very vague and leaves it open to argument about what constitutes "incidental".
|
|
I saw this question posed in a newspaper's legal advice column. The answer given was that the driven car did not need it's own insurance. I actually cut out this answer and gave it to a friend who had been told the opposite and wouldn't believe otherwise.
At the time, we had a family ' pool ' Escort which was not insured in it's own right and she was welcome to use it...but wouldn't. It was registered to me, but I never used it.
I learnt, more recently that it was legal to drive the car, but not to park it, on the road.
We parked it off road and it was never left on the road,in use, just car parks etc. It didn't get a lot of use so probably never pinged a roadcheck.
We never were challenged and the car went to it's grave last year when the MOT ran out, without being replaced.
Ted
|
At the time we had a family ' pool ' Escort which was not insured
How do you tax it?
I learnt more recently that it was legal to drive the car but not to park it on the road.
It's been held in court that as long as the car is left parked as somewhere which is incidental to the journey (ie outside a shop while something is bing collected) then it is covered by the drivers insurance.
We parked it off road and it was never left on the road in use just car parks etc.
Despite what I wrote above, leaving it in a car park is a can of worms as they're usually considered to be covered by the road traffic act so cars in them must be insured.
|
>> At the time we had a family ' pool ' Escort which was not insured How do you tax it?
Ah, BP, there's the secret...you don't tax it !
It was already taxed for a year when I had it on my insurance. It wouldn't have been taxed again but the MOT ran out first.
If the tax had gone first it would have been scrapped then.
Ted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no said the cop, it only allows you to drive if the car your driving also has insurance. >>
re. 3rd party insurance - Driving other cars extension, see
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=78469&...f
"New legislation will propose that taxed cars, on or off the road must be insured
tinyurl.com/mqb9oj"
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=78469&...e
".... the Road Safety Act 2006 see Section 22
www.tinyurl.com/y6mxnk
but as yet no commencement Order has been made in relation to that particular section."
The above was foretold here:
www.guardian.co.uk/money/2005/aug/13/motorinsuranc...e
Current situation with those Insurers who offer DOC extension:
www.crossbrook.com/driving-other-cars-extension-ex...d
www.aviva.co.uk/car-insurance/summary-of-cover.html
"Driving other cars:
We will insure you, for third party only cover, whilst you are driving any other car within Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man providing;
the car does not belong to you or is not hired to you under a hire purchase agreement,
you are driving the car with the owners express consent,
you still have your car and it has not been damaged beyond cost effective repair,
you are aged 25 or above,
your certificate of motor insurance indicates that you can drive such a vehicle."
|
I think that enforcement has changed so much, that I would now be wary of driving a car on my own insurance which did not have it's own cover...i.e, didn't show up on Askmid.
Not for any reasons that I might be breaking the law, but simply that it would ping an ANPR camera and I would risk a strong possibility of having it impounded... Fortuately the kids have 5 vehicles between them, we have 2 and my earlier mentioned friend has 2 so we don't need an emergency spare any more.
Even if you're in the right, it still costs !
Ted
|
It seems to me this perennial question keeps arising because the law is vague and contradictory as to whether the vehicle needs to be insured, or the driver, or both.
You can see some of the oddities that arise from this confusion by taking two extreme cases at opposite ends of the vehicle/driver spectrum:
a) A car whose driver has died still needs insurance if it is parked on the road. Whose responsibility is that, supposing the driver died intestate with no executors? Or supposing the executor is a non-driver - how does he obtain insurance?
b) An insured driver sells his car, and while looking around for a replacement perhaps borrows a friend's old banger. He still requires insurance to drive, even though he owns no car.
|
|
|
|
"Driving other cars: We will insure you for third party only cover whilst you are driving any other car within Great Britain Northern Ireland the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man
8< 8< 8< 8<your certificate of motor insurance indicates that you can drive such a vehicle."
It was all nice and clear until that last statement. My insurance doesn't say anything about types of vehicle. Surely that should read that my Driving License entitles me to drive such a vehicle ( e.g. I'm not insured to drive a HGV even using DOC cover because I'm not covered for that class of vehicle on my driving license.)
|
It was all nice and clear until that last statement. My insurance doesn't say anything about types of vehicle. >>
The statement "your certificate of motor insurance indicates that you can drive such a vehicle" means that your certificate should sate that you have DOC 3rd party only extension. The extension then covers you to drive vehicles as defined by the conditions listed before the final statement in the list as per Aviva. So "such a vehicle" means a vehicle as defined by the statements defined prior to that statement.
Edited by jbif on 30/11/2009 at 10:15
|
|
Last year I rang many of the leading insurers and after getting past the call centre response and spoke to a 'manager' all of them responded that the other vehicle had to be insured in it's own right. Several of them contrary to the call centre's initial response. Regards Peter
|
the other vehicle had to be insured in it's own right. >>
That can't make any difference to your cover if that cover is third party as an extension of your own policy.
The point of compulsory insurance motor is to ensure that if you run over someone on a zebra crossing they will be able to claim against you and have your company pay out on your behalf.
So if you're driving someone else's car the important thing is that you have third party cover. I can't see any other insurance cover on the car really makes any difference to you.
Edit: just seen robertybob's post and will dig out my own policy to check.
Edited by Optimist on 30/11/2009 at 10:52
|
|
|
|
"We will insure you for third party only cover whilst you are driving any other
car within Great Britain"
So in that case, it seems pretty clear that the other car does not have to have any other insurance, and does not have to be owned by someone else - it could be your own car?
But the snag would be that the instant you got out of the car, ie ceased "driving" it, it would be uninsured?
So if a policeman asked you to get out of the car, you would have to decline, and point out to him that he would be aiding and abetting the committing of a traffic offence? Or indeed, incitement to commit an offence?
|
and does not have to be owned by someone else - it could be your own car? >>
No. Read the bits after the word "providing".
it seems pretty clear that the other car does not have to have any other insurance, >>
It depends on what your Insurance t&c state, which may make it explicitly clear one way or the other. The vehicle must be road legal, which presumably means that it has road tax and hence the keeper would have proved insurance in force on the day of obtaining tax disc.
If you are not sure what your Policy does or does not cover, ask your Ins.Co. to explain to you any points of concern in unambiguous simple terms in writing.
|
|
|
But the snag would be that the instant you got out of the car ie ceased "driving" it it would be uninsured?
No, because you're still "using" the vehicle.
There is a legal case which sets a precedent on this (driver stopped at a shop to buy a newspaper or something like that) but I can't for the life of me find it.
|
|
|
|
Quote from my Zurich policy:-
"... any motor car which is not owned by you or hired to you under a hire purchase agreement provided:-
- you have the owners permission to do so.
- the cover is shown as being included on your current certificate of motor insurance.
- there is a separate current insurance policy in force for the car which meets Road Traffic Act requirements."
As ever: it all depends on what the policy says.
|
|
|
So "such a vehicle" means a vehicle as defined by the statements defined prior to that statement.
Ok thanks; that's clear now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
