Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

stopped by guards today, need advise

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    little swift wrote: »
    it means once she has car insureance she is covered to drive the car with his concent.

    she is covered to drive any car.

    So, does it say this in either insurance policy? Are you basing this reassurance on any actual facts?


  • Options
    #63
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    AltAccount wrote: »
    So, does it say this in either insurance policy? Are you basing this reassurance on any actual facts?

    the point is, is that she is covered once she has insureance, she cant be done fore no insureance when she has insureance.


  • Options
    #64
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    little swift wrote: »
    the point is, is that she is covered once she has insureance, she cant be done fore no insureance when she has insureance.

    The point is, you don't actually know that.

    You know she has insurance on her car, and he has it on his, but you don't know if it's comprehensive, TPFT, TP Only, or a mix on the two cars.
    You don't know what kind of driving extensions are on either policy.
    Therefore, you don't know if she's insured to drive his car.

    You are giving advice/reassurance based on not enough information.


  • Options
    #65
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Compton wrote: »
    She'll most likely go to jail for 6 months, driving with no insurance is a serious offense.


    Yes driving w/out insurance is a serious offence but 6 months jailsis not going to happen unless perhaps she is a multiple offender.

    Unless she can talk the judge out of it, looking at a 3/4 month ban off the road.

    This is not Compton..:D


  • Options
    #66
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    AltAccount wrote: »
    The point is, you don't actually know that.

    You know she has insurance on her car, and he has it on his, but you don't know if it's comprehensive, TPFT, TP Only, or a mix on the two cars.
    You don't know what kind of driving extensions are on either policy.
    Therefore, you don't know if she's insured to drive his car.

    You are giving advice/reassurance based on not enough information.

    i'll say it again,

    B,any person driving whose driving is covered.

    it dose'nt matter what car it is , she is covered to drive, so therefor she cant be done for not having no insureance when she dose have insureance.

    she was asked to produce it and if she dose there is nothing more the garda can do . she is covered to drive.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    little swift wrote: »
    i'll say it again,

    B,any person driving whose driving is covered.

    it dose'nt matter what car it is , she is covered to drive, so therefor she cant be done for not having no insureance when she dose have insureance.

    she was asked to produce it and if she dose there is nothing more the garda can do . she is covered to drive.

    Say it as many times as you want, it still doesn't make sense.

    You're saying anyone who has insurance is automatically insured to drive other cars?


  • Options
    #68
    rex-x
    Registered Users Posts: 1,893 ✭✭✭rex-x


    Im amazed by the amount of people who have already posted and only one has pointed out that driving of other cars for the most part does NOT cover your spouse/partner on your car


  • Options
    #69
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    AltAccount wrote: »
    Say it as many times as you want, it still doesn't make sense.

    You're saying anyone who has insurance is automatically insured to drive other cars?

    if she has concent to drive that car and that car is not stolen yes.


  • Options
    #70
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    little swift wrote: »
    i'll say it again,

    B,any person driving whose driving is covered.

    it dose'nt matter what car it is , she is covered to drive, so therefor she cant be done for not having no insureance when she dose have insureance.

    she was asked to produce it and if she dose there is nothing more the garda can do . she is covered to drive.
    And I'll say it again and again and again - you don't have enough information about either policy or driver to make that statement. OP seems to have disappeared from the scene and thus can't update us.

    As they have the policies concerned for which they filled out the proposal forms only they have access to the information to check if her driving was covered.

    As OP seems worried it is a reasonable assumption as they never bothered to check or take any steps to ensure she was covered, that in fact her driving was not covered when she was stopped. If it transpires she was covered, then it is pure coincidence and not as a result of careful planning or checking. Simplez


  • Options
    #71
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,339 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    rex-x wrote: »
    Im amazed by the amount of people who have already posted and only one has pointed out that driving of other cars for the most part does NOT cover your spouse/partner on your car

    ..... at least two have.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    TeaServer
    Registered Users Posts: 157 ✭✭TeaServer


    Every policy is different! On mine for the section for driving other cars simply states (emphasis mine):
    DRIVING OTHER CARS – WHAT IS COVERED
    If your Certificate of Motor Insurance says so, we will insure you to drive any Private Car that you do not own and have not hired under a hire-purchase or leasing agreement.

    DRIVING OTHER CARS – WHAT IS NOT COVERED
    • Legal liability unless your Certificate of Motor Insurance states that you are covered to drive other cars.
    • Any loss or damage to the Private Car you are driving.
    • Driving without the owner’s permission.
    • Use of a Private Car outside the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Great Britain, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.
    • Legal liability which is covered by any other insurance you have to drive the other Car or when you no longer have possession of the Insured Car or it has been damaged so much that it is not worth repairing or has been stolen and you have not got it back.
    • Loss or damage to any property belonging to (or in the care of) any driver or passenger who is making a claim under this Section.
    • Death or injury to the person driving or in charge of the other Car


  • Options
    #73
    Mimikyu
    Registered Users Posts: 18,904 ✭✭✭✭Mimikyu


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #74
    Tigger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,707 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    jackie.du wrote: »
    thank you guys, thank god she got full licence. We won't find out if she's being covered by her own insurance company until Tuesday next week. but that option is like a fine print that she won't realized while she sign up the insurance years ago.

    drive other cars is pretty standard for full lisence holders over 25 years old
    partner is insured also is pretty standard on fully lisenced poartners


  • Options
    #75
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    mathepac wrote: »
    And I'll say it again and again and again - you don't have enough information about either policy or driver to make that statement. OP seems to have disappeared from the scene and thus can't update us.

    As they have the policies concerned for which they filled out the proposal forms only they have access to the information to check if her driving was covered.

    As OP seems worried it is a reasonable assumption as they never bothered to check or take any steps to ensure she was covered, that in fact her driving was not covered when she was stopped. If it transpires she was covered, then it is pure coincidence and not as a result of careful planning or checking. Simplez

    Most of our customers (aged over 25 years and with a full licence) have automatic third party cover to drive someone else’s car. The easiest way to see if you are covered is to check your certificate of insurance.

    this is from the AXA site, so i'd say all insurers are the same,i dont need the OP to confirm this because the two main words here are most and automatic as i said you cant be done for having no INS when the person dose have it . over and out,


  • Options
    #76
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    little swift wrote: »
    Most of our customers (aged over 25 years and with a full licence) have automatic third party cover to drive someone else’s car.

    Even if it's third party only insurance on their main vehicle?

    little swift wrote: »
    The easiest way to see if you are covered is to check your certificate of insurance.

    Exactly!

    little swift wrote: »
    this is from the AXA site, so i'd say all insurers are the same

    Ah crap, and you were doing sooo well...

    little swift wrote: »
    i dont need the OP to confirm this because the two main words here are most and automatic

    So they should check their own specific policy then?

    little swift wrote: »
    as i said you cant be done for having no INS when the person dose have it

    But if they don't have it, then they can be done?

    little swift wrote: »
    over and out,


  • Options
    #77
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    AltAccount wrote: »
    Even if it's third party only insurance on their main vehicle?




    Exactly!




    Ah crap, and you were doing sooo well...




    So they should check their own specific policy then?




    But if they don't have it, then they can be done?

    The op said she dose.

    Liability coverage is what allows a driver to drive a friend's car and still be covered under their own auto insurance policy.

    persons, or classes of persons, whose LIABITITY is covered.

    A the insured.
    B.any person driving whose driving is covered.


  • Options
    #78
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    little swift wrote: »
    The op said she dose.

    Where? I fully apologise if I missed something.

    jackie.du wrote: »
    Hi guys

    here is the story, we went to the town for shopping today and my wife drove my car back from the town. went through a check point today, guards has stopped us and checked the insurance/tax, which is fine as I have it displayed.
    however, He started asking for her driving license ect... and asked her if she got an insurance to drive my car. she has her own insurance for her own car alright, but I doubt if her insurance will cover her to drive my car too. we have to ring up the insurance company to check this out on Tuesday, but in the meantime, the guards asked my wife to produce her insurance cert in a garda station within 10 days. My question is, how serious is this? if she find out on Tuesday that her own insurance won't cover to drive my car, will she go to court?

    thank you all.
    jackie.du wrote: »
    thank you guys, thank god she got full licence. We won't find out if she's being covered by her own insurance company until Tuesday next week. but that option is like a fine print that she won't realized while she sign up the insurance years ago.
    jackie.du wrote: »
    I was on a few drink and I think I'm not suitable for drive which I believe this is to protect public safety??
    jackie.du wrote: »
    Thanks pkiernan, will this leads her an impression that not being honest?
    jackie.du wrote: »
    the guards took down everything the reg, her DL number, my DL number, name address ect...Oh and, asked for our contact number. originally this was only a alcohol screen test


  • Options
    #79
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    rex-x wrote: »
    Im amazed by the amount of people who have already posted and only one has pointed out that driving of other cars for the most part does NOT cover your spouse/partner on your car

    My last policy did, but my current one does not (it specifically excludes cars at the same address), but I have confirmed and saved a few quid going named driver on the other policy and its fully comp, but I agree with what you are saying can be the case. Anyway, those details should be on any policy cert/document
    little swift wrote: »
    Most of our customers (aged over 25 years and with a full licence) have automatic third party cover to drive someone else’s car. The easiest way to see if you are covered is to check your certificate of insurance.

    this is from the AXA site, so i'd say all insurers are the same,i dont need the OP to confirm this because the two main words here are most and automatic as i said you cant be done for having no INS when the person dose have it . over and out,

    That leaves a few possibilities to not be covered, even if they are with the company you are with.
    little swift wrote: »
    The op said she dose.

    Liability coverage is what allows a driver to drive a friend's car and still be covered under their own auto insurance policy.

    persons, or classes of persons, whose LIABITITY is covered.

    A the insured.
    B.any person driving whose driving is covered.

    I think a partner must be classed differently as a person could be driving their partners car effectively all the time as it is most likely at the same address as they live.

    eg, as above, my own new policy will not cover me to drive my partners car as its at the same address, but I could for example drive anyone elses with their permission as long as it is normally kept elsewhere (I presume that has to be provable by the insurance/tax/reg address details).


  • Options
    #80
    little swift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭little swift


    AltAccount wrote: »
    Where? I fully apologise if I missed something.
    sorry my apologises i mistook full licence for insurance.

    well all i am sayiny if she dose have ins she has nothing to worry about and if she dont, she should have not be driving.


  • Options
    #81
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    little swift wrote: »
    sorry my apologises i mistook full licence for insurance.

    well all i am sayiny if she dose have ins she has nothing to worry about and if she dont, she should have not be driving.

    The thing is, if she does have insurance doesnt mean she has nothing to worry about, she may still not be covered to drive her partners car even only third party, I had cover third party for my partners car from my previous policy but my new policy specifically excludes it if the partners car is kept at same address as my own car
    (assuming they live together and the car is registered and kept at the same address)

    The policy document will confirm who is covered and for what eventualities.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    whyulittle
    Registered Users Posts: 3,878 ✭✭✭whyulittle


    http://www.axa.ie/download/axa-car-insurance-post-07112011.pdf

    AXA Policy Doc
    Loss of or damage to a car you borrow from another person

    This cover does not apply unless it is shown in your schedule under section 1.

    As well as covering you for your legal responsibility to others, we will give you cover as described in section 1. If you have cover under section 2 we will cover damage to any car you are driving (under clause 5(b) of your certificate).

    This cover will only apply if:
    - the policy schedule shows that your cover is comprehensive;
    - the certificate of motor insurance contains the ‘driving other cars’ clause number 5(b);
    - you drive a private passenger vehicle. It does not include:
    • Vans;
    • Car-vans;
    • Jeep type vehicles with no seats in the back;or
    • Vans adapted to carry passengers.
    - you are responsible for looking after a car that is being driven under clause 5(b) of the certificate;
    - you do not regularly use or drive the car;
    - there is no other insurance policy which covers you driving that car (whether or not that policy would cover what is covered by this extended cover);
    - the car does not belong to you or your husband, wife or partner;
    - you have the owner’s permission to drive the car and have been driving it for less than 30 days; and
    - the loss or damage happens in Ireland.

    The most we will pay under this extended cover is €50,000.


  • Options
    #83
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,184 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    whyulittle wrote: »
    http://www.axa.ie/download/axa-car-insurance-post-07112011.pdf

    AXA Policy Doc

    Interestingly, one reasonable interpretation of what you have quoted s that it is only the "extended cover", i.e. that relating to damage to the borrowed car, which is the subject of the additional requirements and that "liability to others" is not so limited. If this is the case, this extension would mean that relevant AXA policyholders were always covered for the legal minimum (i.e. 3rd party cover).


  • Options
    #84
    andrewg82
    Registered Users Posts: 51 ✭✭andrewg82


    fine and a few points max


  • Options
    #85
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Anan1 wrote: »
    I can't see how any of this reflects on our insurance system.

    Well, in Germany the car is insured.
    If you want to borrow a car in Ireland, see this thread and hundreds of others, hire a solicitor to study the fine print and in the end the answer is "maybe".

    Meanwhile, in Germany:
    Dude: "Hey, can I borrow your car?"
    Mate: "Sure, just be careful" (tosses keys over)

    Other example:
    Ring insurance company and ask to insure an ex-military vehicle, Russian import, one-off build or otherwise nearly unheard of car: "No problem, your quote will be xxx hundred Euros"
    In Ireland: Major conference needs to be called where experts argue for two weeks before issuing a quote of E793465210975097235 and 25 cent.

    The insurance system is is one of the most intolerant, inflexible, needlessly complicated, discriminating and moronic examples that can be found on Earth.
    Sorry to go on a rant, it's not too bad for me personally, because even though I'm male, I am now old enough and drive a n/a car that it's not a problem.
    But for years trying to get a car insured that wasn't a 5 year old n/a Jap or Eurobox or trying to borrow someone else's car where mind-numbing ordeals, especially driving other cars.
    As we have seen from this thread the insurance companies are trying to address this issue by introducing more complications on top of the existing ones and it's just causing chaos, as no one is now sure if they can drive other cars without going through their contracts with an expert in motoring law.
    I'm not even sure I can drive my GF's car anymore, because I have TP cover on other cars, but this "not the ones owned by spouses/partners" clause now has me worried.
    This thread wouldn't even exist in Germany.


  • Options
    #86
    Avns1s
    Registered Users Posts: 3,422 ✭✭✭Avns1s


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    Well, in Germany the car is insured.
    If you want to borrow a car in Ireland, see this thread and hundreds of others, hire a solicitor to study the fine print and in the end the answer is "maybe".

    Meanwhile, in Germany:
    Dude: "Hey, can I borrow your car?"
    Mate: "Sure, just be careful" (tosses keys over)

    Other example:
    Ring insurance company and ask to insure an ex-military vehicle, Russian import, one-off build or otherwise nearly unheard of car: "No problem, your quote will be xxx hundred Euros"
    In Ireland: Major conference needs to be called where experts argue for two weeks before issuing a quote of E793465210975097235 and 25 cent.

    The insurance system is is one of the most intolerant, inflexible, needlessly complicated, discriminating and moronic examples that can be found on Earth.
    Sorry to go on a rant, it's not too bad for me personally, because even though I'm male, I am now old enough and drive a n/a car that it's not a problem.
    But for years trying to get a car insured that wasn't a 5 year old n/a Jap or Eurobox or trying to borrow someone else's car where mind-numbing ordeals, especially driving other cars.
    As we have seen from this thread the insurance companies are trying to address this issue by introducing more complications on top of the existing ones and it's just causing chaos, as no one is now sure if they can drive other cars without going through their contracts with an expert in motoring law.
    I'm not even sure I can drive my GF's car anymore, because I have TP cover on other cars, but this "not the ones owned by spouses/partners" clause now has me worried.
    This thread wouldn't even exist in Germany.

    We're not in Germany so your argument is irrelevant.

    There are dozens of models for insurance but we have what we have for the moment at least. It's a small market so I don't foresee any major changes anytime soon. It's also an expensive market for insurers thanks to our willingness to claim huge personal injury awards and the costs of our legal system, another reason why it will be as curtailed as it is for a long time to come.


  • Options
    #87
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    Avns1s wrote: »
    We're not in Germany so your argument is irrelevant.

    There are dozens of models for insurance but we have what we have for the moment at least. It's a small market so I don't foresee any major changes anytime soon. It's also an expensive market for insurers thanks to our willingness to claim huge personal injury awards and the costs of our legal system, another reason why it will be as curtailed as it is for a long time to come.

    But he does make valid points that we could take on board, ie in Ireland, take whats good about other countries policies regarding anything and apply them here.
    I thought to some extent the huge claims problem had at least started to be addressed.
    We seem to have a habit of inventing ways of drawing out anything that should be relatively simple/easier. Maybe thats due to vested interests as there is no benefit/maybe even a loss for some people to process things rapidly/do things differently (ie change).


  • Options
    #88
    snaps
    Registered Users Posts: 7,138 ✭✭✭snaps


    Blue850 wrote: »
    Be careful of the third party cover on other cars clause.
    When I was insured with AXA, "driving of other cars" excluded Spouse/partner's car, I had to name my wife on my policy and she had to name me on hers.

    It is the same with RSA as well, we both (My wife and I) thought we were insured to drive each others cars as we had the other car bit on our policys, but reading small print, spouse/partner living at same address is not valid and have to be a named driver.


  • Options
    #89
    dublinbogger
    Registered Users Posts: 9 ✭dublinbogger


    some good advice there did you get garda name per chance, in worts case scenario and your wife is prosecuted in district courtand convicted make sure she lodges appeal within 14 days, this allows her to drive, lodge appeal to circuit court and then get solicitor/ barrister to look for disqualification to be removed under special circumstance, its will boil down to Garda and or Judge believing it was a genuine mistake


  • Options
    #90
    Jimdagym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,843 ✭✭✭Jimdagym


    snaps wrote: »
    It is the same with RSA as well, we both (My wife and I) thought we were insured to drive each others cars as we had the other car bit on our policys, but reading small print, spouse/partner living at same address is not valid and have to be a named driver.

    I am with RSA and after reading this thread I checked my cert and the policy documentation and nowhere does it state that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    mathepac
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭mathepac


    little swift wrote: »
    Most of our customers (aged over 25 years and with a full licence) have automatic third party cover to drive someone else’s car. ...
    See, you're guessing again. You don't know OP's wife's age
    little swift wrote: »
    ... The easiest way to see if you are covered is to check your certificate of insurance.
    That has already been suggested, but it should have been done before OP went on the piss.
    little swift wrote: »
    ... this is from the AXA site, so i'd say all insurers are the same,...
    See what you did there? You're guessing again and you guessed wrong, again.
    little swift wrote: »
    ... i dont need the OP to confirm this because the two main words here are most and automatic as i said you cant be done for having no INS when the person dose have it . ...
    If you work for AXA all I can say is thank God they don't insure our cars.

    Let me know if you ever enter "MasterMind, the Also-rans" as you'll lost that as well and I enjoy a good laugh.
    little swift wrote: »
    ... over and out,
    This means we won't hear from you again - YIPPEEE


Advertisement