Insurance question

tipp86

The exact terms are as follows

"Any motor car been driven,with the consent of the owner,by the insured, provided the vehicle does not belong to him/her"

Does this allow me to drive a car with no insurance policy on it. I seem to have gotten an answer that it does allow me to do this but no harm in a double check.

Anan1

tipp1986 wrote: »

I seem to have gotten an answer that it does allow me to do this but no harm in a double check.

+1, ask your insurer.

MugMugs

tipp1986 wrote: »

The exact terms are as follows

"Any motor car been driven,with the consent of the owner,by the insured, provided the vehicle does not belong to him/her"

Does this allow me to drive a car with no insurance policy on it. I seem to have gotten an answer that it does allow me to do this but no harm in a double check.

Yes but before you do so, call your insurer and verify with THEM

tipp86

Ya i have done in the past, i would just fear the worst if something happened.

One guy says it needs a valid Nct and tax whereas the other two said it needed nothing. I assume its a grey area and cover would have to be given. I mean from a very basic study of insurance law i think im well covered. One guy said they didnt care if i was driving a Porsche but that if i wrote it off its my own bad luck.

I just posted here to see if anyone had any direct experience.

It does open a loophole where you could have someone insured on "your" car and you could just drive "someone elses" car and essentially you are getting a very cheap insurance. I do understand that this in theory breaks the rule of you supposedly been the main driver of the car but that is pretty much impossible for an insurer to prove.

djimi

I think any 3rd party extension (certainly any Ive ever seen or had) has the condition that the car must be taxed and NCT'd; thats just a basic legal condition of having the road, regardless of how it is insured.

There is no point second guessing or trying to debate loopholes; the only people who can give you a definitive answer on this are your insurance company.

djimi

tipp1986 wrote: »

It does open a loophole where you could have someone insured on "your" car and you could just drive "someone elses" car and essentially you are getting a very cheap insurance. I do understand that this in theory breaks the rule of you supposedly been the main driver of the car but that is pretty much impossible for an insurer to prove.

Thats pretty much what went on over her for years, when there were an awful lot of mammys "driving" Imprezas and the likes! In recent years Ive seen peoples policies include restrictions such as the 3rd party extension doesnt cover cars registered in your name or to a spouse/immediate family member. Not sure how common this is, but the insurers definately tried to crack down.

carbon nanotube

tipp1986 wrote: »

The exact terms are as follows

"Any motor car been driven,with the consent of the owner,by the insured, provided the vehicle does not belong to him/her"

Does this allow me to drive a car with no insurance policy on it. I seem to have gotten an answer that it does allow me to do this but no harm in a double check.

I was just checking this yesterday as I drove the accord across the midlands and was thinking after was I insured, the car was taxed I thought that would do.


my take is that if the car IS insured you can drive it...if its not insured you are in the wrong.

thankfully the last owner of the accord was still insured on the accord and cancelled today , (i transferred over mine today)

you can never know what would happen on the roads...

deaglan169

it is my belief also that the other car you drive has to be insured then your insurance will cover you while driving that car 3rd party

mgbgt1978

Both of the above are wrong. It is up to your insurer to stipulate that the "other" car must have a policy in force....most don't.
Also most insurance companies will insist that the other car is roadworthy, which is taken to mean that the car is taxed and NCT'd (although they often don't specifically say that).
Anyway, what is the point of the other car being insured by someone if that insurance doesn't cover you to drive it ?
You are driving it under the terms of your own policy, usually 3rd party only (unless you are a good customer of AXA's).

dr.fuzzenstein

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Both of the above are wrong. It is up to your insurer to stipulate that the "other" car must have a policy in force....most don't.
Also most insurance companies will insist that the other car is roadworthy, which is taken to mean that the car is taxed and NCT'd (although they often don't specifically say that).
Anyway, what is the point of the other car being insured by someone if that insurance doesn't cover you to drive it ?
You are driving it under the terms of your own policy, usually 3rd party only (unless you are a good customer of AXA's).

Well, in my own case I was included in the GF's insurance on her car fully comp and she was included on mine.
For some reason her crowd wanted more money to include me, so I got dropped, whilst my crowd charged nothing to have her included, so she stayed.
So if I drive her car, I do so under my own policy that allows me to drive other cars.
As long as I don't stuff it into a hedge, all will be fine!;)

CiniO

tipp1986 wrote: »

The exact terms are as follows

"Any motor car been driven,with the consent of the owner,by the insured, provided the vehicle does not belong to him/her"

Does this allow me to drive a car with no insurance policy on it. I seem to have gotten an answer that it does allow me to do this but no harm in a double check.

I think that above quotation from your policy is clear.
If you were allowed to drive other car only provided car has it's own insurance, surely it would be worded there. If it isn't then what can stop you from doing so?

CiniO

Anan1 wrote: »

+1, ask your insurer.

MugMugs wrote: »

Yes but before you do so, call your insurer and verify with THEM

djimi wrote: »

I think any 3rd party extension (certainly any Ive ever seen or had) has the condition that the car must be taxed and NCT'd; thats just a basic legal condition of having the road, regardless of how it is insured.

There is no point second guessing or trying to debate loopholes; the only people who can give you a definitive answer on this are your insurance company.

I can't see a point in here for ringing insurance company, as their customer helplines are crap anyway, and everyone there says different (very often contradicting) things.

All rules about what you can or can't do, are governed by insurance law and insurance policy which terms and conditions you agreed when you bought it.

Any further guessing or asking their customer service advisors is pointless really.
If written documents don't prohibit something then it means it's allowed.
There shouldn't really be any doubt here.

tipp86

Is there some section of the law that stipulates a car should have an insurance disk on the window? The lady in the insurance company stated that showing them the big insurance slip was enough.

pa990

Whatever the insurance company say....
Get it in writing