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

Temporary insurance for debs?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    ironclaw
    Registered Users Posts: 8,004 ✭✭✭ironclaw


    slimjimmc wrote: »
    Even if his brother transferred his policy and the insurance allowed the OP drive it there is still the matter of the OP planning on driving without a supervising driver. He didn't say it straight out but it's clear that's what he intended. Even if the date had a full licence for 2 years he'd still be driving to pick her up and he's hardly going to bring his ma/da/brother along.

    Not only would the chances of getting caught be increased (Gardaí paying extra attention to the area) it could have very serious insurance ramifications if something happened.

    OP, forget the idea of you driving at all, it's much more impressive to be chauffeured than to be chaperoned.

    Of course. Sorry, I read that but was assuming that if they were bothered to go to that much hassle then it would be all above board on the license front as well. Just offering a solution to one half of the problem of which there are many.

    Bridge too far OP I think.


  • Options
    #63
    H3llR4iser
    Registered Users Posts: 4,027 ✭✭✭H3llR4iser


    This is really funny: we were talking about the odd Irish attitude towards getting a driving license and instead pretend it's ok to drive on a provisional or learner's permit indefinitely just a few threads ago, and then this comes up.

    Sorry to be harsh but, as simple as it is, the OP does NOT have a driving license; Therefore, he can't drive anywhere. End of it.


  • Options
    #64
    IrishLad2012
    Registered Users Posts: 276 ✭✭IrishLad2012


    MartinC336 wrote: »
    Yes..in what regard? A 15minute drive from the woman's house to the hotel, and I'll be minding it for dear life.
    What they are saying here is no insurance company will insure an 18 year old on a BMW 318i, not that it matters in your case because the car isn't insured. Your brother isn't covered on this car either as their is no insurance policy on the car.


  • Options
    #65
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    IrishLad2012 wrote: »
    Your brother isn't covered on this car either as their is no insurance policy on the car.

    People repeating this constantly is not going to start making it true...

    Its been said in the thread already that the other car almost certainly does not need to be insured. It hasnt been a stipulation of third party extension with the main insurers for quite a while now.


  • Options
    #66
    slimjimmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,787 ✭✭✭slimjimmc


    IrishLad2012 wrote: »
    What they are saying here is no insurance company will insure an 18 year old on a BMW 318i, not that it matters in your case because the car isn't insured. Your brother isn't covered on this car either as their is no insurance policy on the car.

    This is certainly not the norm, I've never seen a policy that required the other car to be insured and posters on previous threads have reported the same as me.

    Insurance policies usually only state that if the driver is covered by another insurance policy then he should claim against that policy. That's not the same as saying the car must be insured.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    djimi wrote: »
    It depends on the restrictions; I have seen some third party extension not cover cars that were registered to a family member (I presume the insurer was sick of covering all the 60 year old women and their Type Rs :rolleyes:)

    I've never seen this on a policy on any of the 3 or 4 companies I've been with or the different companies family members have been insured with.

    It would be ridiculous really as its probably the most used and useful aspect of the 3rd party extension, that is for family members to be able to drive each others cars. It's in constant use in my home place as we are always driving each others cars for various different reasons.


  • Options
    #68
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Sara Vast Peekaboo wrote: »
    I've never seen this on a policy on any of the 3 or 4 companies I've been with or the different companies family members have been insured with.

    It would be ridiculous really as its probably the most used and useful aspect of the 3rd party extension, that is for family members to be able to drive each others cars. It's in constant use in my home place as we are always driving each others cars for various different reasons.

    I remember seeing it in at least one policy a few years back. I cant remember who it was with, but it was something along the lines of you couldnt drive a car registered to a direct family member (I dont think spouse counted). Maybe I am remembering it arseways, but it stood out as being overly restrictive compared to most policies.

    I assumed they were trying to clamp down on young lads insuring a 1L Micra and their ma registering and insuring a Subaru or the likes.


  • Options
    #69
    wonski
    Registered Users Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭wonski


    djimi wrote: »
    I remember seeing it in at least one policy a few years back. I cant remember who it was with, but it was something along the lines of you couldnt drive a car registered to a direct family member (I dont think spouse counted). Maybe I am remembering it arseways, but it stood out as being overly restrictive compared to most policies.

    I assumed they were trying to clamp down on young lads insuring a 1L Micra and their ma registering and insuring a Subaru or the likes.

    Had it on Tesco polisy (not sure who was the underwriter - RSA?), car could not belong to the Insured, his direct family member or anyone living at the same address (house mates etc).

    Aviva put a 1.4 engine limit on their policy.

    It is always worth to read all the documents before making any assumptions for the third party extension.


  • Options
    #70
    oldyouth
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,754 ✭✭✭oldyouth


    Zurich had it at one point (probably still do) that your driving of other cars extension did not cover a spouse's vehicle.

    As others have indicated, everybody's contract is different, even with the same insurer, and you need to read the damn thing


  • Options
    #71
    christy02
    Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭christy02


    Hilarious. So in your mind I can buy a 1l micra or something. Insure it with open driving. Buy a big v6 beemer and drive under same policy! Lol


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    wonski
    Registered Users Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭wonski


    christy02 wrote: »
    Hilarious. So in your mind I can buy a 1l micra or something. Insure it with open driving. Buy a big v6 beemer and drive under same policy! Lol

    In who's mind:confused:

    Every single poster points out that the third party extension does not apply to the car(s) owned by the insured. Not to mention the other condition (engine size limit etc).

    And can we stop mixing the "open drive" policy with the "driving other cars" policy? Seems like half of the country doen't see the difference, and there is a big difference between these two.


  • Options
    #73
    oldyouth
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,754 ✭✭✭oldyouth


    wonski wrote: »
    In who's mind:confused:

    And can we stop mixing the "open drive" policy with the "driving other cars" policy? Seems like half of the country doen't see the difference, and there is a big difference between these two.

    Can't thank this quote enough


  • Options
    #74
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    wonski wrote: »
    And can we stop mixing the "open drive" policy with the "driving other cars" policy? Seems like half of the country doen't see the difference, and there is a big difference between these two.

    It makes discussions like this extremely tedious.


  • Options
    #75
    wonski
    Registered Users Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭wonski


    djimi wrote: »
    It makes discussions like this extremely tedious.

    Every single thread containing words like insurance, open drive and provisional license ends up like this anyway.

    I don't even know why I take part in this tbh - we all know the op can't drive this car, but it will take 10 pages to explain it all.


  • Options
    #76
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    wonski wrote: »
    Every single thread containing words like insurance, open drive and provisional license ends up like this anyway.

    I don't even know why I take part in this tbh - we all know the op can't drive this car, but it will take 10 pages to explain it all.

    I was giving the OP the benefit of the doubt that they were going to follow the law and have a licensed driver with them while driving the car, and as such was just responding to the question regarding the insurance. Im sure the OP knows full well that it is illegal to drive a car unaccompanied when on a leaners permit, and Im sure that they werent suggesting doing such a thing ;)


  • Options
    #77
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,641 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    leaving-brooklyn-sign.jpg


Advertisement