Irish Resident Driving a UK Registered car in Ireland

boogerballs

My wife is from the UK but she has been living in the republic for 10 years. We have two kids and own our own house however due to her not being able to find work and wanting to be closer to her family we are moving back to London. We are going to live with her parents. Here is my question, I am working here on a contract basis and when this contract is finished we will permanently move but that could be anything from 3 months to two years. In the meantime we are going to start the move, register in the UK, open bank accounts ect. If we buy a car and insure and tax it over there can we drive it over here until we move – i.e. as long as we have all supporting documentation are we entitled to drive a uk reg car here for up to two years?

Dangel4x4

Irish resident driving a UK car in Ireland = not allowed.

boogerballs

Dangel4x4 wrote: »

Irish resident driving a UK car in Ireland = not allowed.

Understood, but in this case we’ll also be UK residents withall supporting documentation

Dangel4x4

boogerballs wrote: »

I am working here on a contract basis and when this contract is finished we will permanently move but that could be anything from 3 months to two years.

Which makes you an Irish resident, no?

Unless you're working for cash in hand, the Revenue will know where you're resident for tax purposes. I doubt if crashing at the in-laws house in London would qualify you as a UK resident, as you say you own a house in this country.

It's the Revenue you'd have to convince if you met them at a checkpoint, not me.

Dangel4x4

Here's the Revenue's take on the whole residency thing:

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/vrt/leaflets/temporary-exemption-foreign-registered.html

2. What Conditions Apply

Any imported vehicle which is owned by or registered in the name of a non-resident person is not required to be registered in Ireland subject to the following conditions:

The vehicle must have been acquired with all the appropriate taxes paid and these must not have been exempted or refunded in any way. The standard registration plates in use in the domestic market of a country are normally accepted as evidence of this.
The vehicle may not in any circumstances be driven by a State resident.
The vehicle may not be disposed of or hired out in the State or lent to a State resident.
The period of time that the vehicle is in the State does not exceed 12 months.
A longer period may apply where a person is on a task of definite duration in the State.

3. What is meant by "State resident" and "non-resident"?

A "State resident" is a person whose normal residence is in the Republic of Ireland and a "non-resident" is anyone whose normal residence is outside the State.

Normal Residence means:

the place where you usually live, for at least 185 days in the year, because of occupational and personal ties
if you have no occupational ties, the place where you usually live for at least 185 days in the year, because of personal ties.
if your occupational ties are in a different country from your personal ties then the country of your personal ties is taken as your normal residence if you return there regularly (i.e. for most of your non-working days).
A person who is normally resident in the State but who lives outside the State primarily for the purpose of attending a school or university is regarded as a State resident.
The rules regarding normal residency are in line with the EU Directives in this regard, especially Directive 83/182/EEC.

boogerballs

Dangel4x4 wrote: »

Which makes you an Irish resident, no?

Unless you're working for cash in hand, the Revenue will know where you're resident for tax purposes. I doubt if crashing at the in-laws house in London would qualify you as a UK resident, as you say you own a house in this country.

It's the Revenue you'd have to convince if you met them at a checkpoint, not me.

Ah Dangel, so your not open to a brown envelope full of cash then

I get what you are saying but am hoping to buy a car sooner rather than later over there. Thanks for the reply. I'll look into it a bit further

ted1

i doubt your insurance will cover you, normally they have a limit on the number of days they cover out of the home jurisdiction

boogerballs

ted1 wrote: »

i doubt your insurance will cover you, normally they have a limit on the number of days they cover out of the home jurisdiction

Ah ok thanks lads, looks like I'll leave it so

vibe666

insurance would *normally* cover you for up to 90 days at a time outside of the UK, although there may also be a limit on the total number of days in a year the car can spend outside of the home country.

if your wife isn't employed and is intending to leave anyway, maybe its time for her to start the paperwork to get it official (tax refunds etc.). i'm sure there is an official process for a foreign worker to cut ties in ireland and get it all set up again in the UK and register to sign on etc.

once she's done that, she (as any other englander) would be free to come to ireland on holiday and drive her UK registered car here for (insurance permitting) up to 90 days at a time as long as she spends at least as much time (plus 1 day) in the UK. you wouldn't be able to drive the car at all though if you're working here.

of course if it comes to it, she might have to prove it all if you're here a while, but she wouldn't be the only one in the country driving round on english plates for an extended period if she did.

of course i wouldn't be advocating breaking the law in any way, but theoretically speaking...

slimjimmc

vibe666 wrote: »

insurance would *normally* cover you for up to 90 days at a time outside of the UK, although there may also be a limit on the total number of days in a year the car can spend outside of the home country.

That time limit only applies to enhanced cover such as Fire, Theft and Comprehensive cover which are not required by law. There is no such time limit on the minimum 3rd party cover required by law, you can be away for as long as you want and you still have legal cover until the policy expires.

corktina

That would apply to an Irish policy, I'm not so sure about an UK policy being the same.

djimi

slimjimmc wrote: »

That time limit only applies to enhanced cover such as Fire, Theft and Comprehensive cover which are not required by law. There is no such time limit on the minimum 3rd party cover required by law, you can be away for as long as you want and you still have legal cover until the policy expires.

The legal cover means that they have to cover third party expenses. Is there anything to stop them turning around and pursuing you to recover their costs afterwards, as you have breached the terms of the policy?

Dangel4x4

corktina wrote: »

That would apply to an Irish policy, I'm not so sure about an UK policy being the same.

Yep, read the terms and conditions that came with your policy and don't assume anything when it comes to insurance policies!

corktina

corktina wrote: »

That would apply to an Irish policy, I'm not so sure about an UK policy being the same.

Is it not an EU law rather than something implemented by Irish insurance companies?

corktina

I don't know and by the looks of it, you don't either. In my opinion, a policy is void once you are outside the terms and conditions of it. I don't see how it could be a Law. You have to have minimum third party cover under the Road Traffic Act (or whatever). If you go outside the T&C, the Company are entitled in my view to revoke the policy.

djimi

corktina wrote: »

I don't know and by the looks of it, you don't either. In my opinion, a policy is void once you are outside the terms and conditions of it. I don't see how it could be a Law. You have to have minimum third party cover under the Road Traffic Act (or whatever). If you go outside the T&C, the Company are entitled in my view to revoke the policy.

Under EU law an insurer cannot refuse third party cover on an active policy. They can pursue the policy holder separately for costs paid out if they so wish, but they cannot refuse to pay out.

Clearlier

Dangel4x4 wrote: »

Here's the Revenue's take on the whole residency thing:

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/vrt/leaflets/temporary-exemption-foreign-registered.html

On a phone so quoting is a bit awkward but the bit about determining residency by personal ties rather than occupational ones where the two are in different countries provided you return regularly to the country that you have personal ties in would suggest to me that you could drive a UK reg ocer here. That said I wouldn't do it given that you're already here and if challenged would be trying to prove that your residency had changed even though you hadn't moved.

corktina

djimi wrote: »

Under EU law an insurer cannot refuse third party cover on an active policy. They can pursue the policy holder separately for costs paid out if they so wish, but they cannot refuse to pay out.

now you did it...you'll have to prove that is EU law now.

Dangel4x4

Clearlier wrote: »

On a phone so quoting is a bit awkward but the bit about determining residency by personal ties rather than occupational ones where the two are in different countries provided you return regularly to the country that you have personal ties in would suggest to me that you could drive a UK reg ocer here.

I don't know... I wouldn't like to be arguing the toss with a Customs officer at the side of the road.

Anybody thinking of doing it would want to seek legal advice before trying it IMHO.

revenue.ie wrote:

if your occupational ties are in a different country from your personal ties then the country of your personal ties is taken as your normal residence if you return there regularly (i.e. for most of your non-working days).

stealthyspeeder

Your "personal ties" are a legal grey area. The revenue used to define them as "family" or "social" ties, however they removed this definition from their VRT2 leaflet in March 2014.

If you own a property in the ROI, and you spend the majority of time with your family in the ROI, you would need an exceptional story to convince the Revenue that your personal ties (and thus your normal residence) are in the UK. With house and wife in ROI, I dont see anyway you could say your normal residence is in the UK.

Also although not relevant to this, but worth mentioning for anyone googling this thread later, that the revenue defining "regular" returns as returns that need to occur for "most of your non working days" is absolute nonsense. (in practice it would mean that Europeans who weren't from Northern Ireland would be discriminated against.) The revenue will probably change this in the near future, and I would expect them to back down, if challenged on it.

keithclancy

corktina wrote: »

now you did it...you'll have to prove that is EU law now.

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/insurance/consumer/motor/index_en.htm

The directive:
obliges all motor vehicles in the EU to be covered by compulsory third party insurance (all passengers are covered, throughout the EU)
abolishes border checks on insurance, so that vehicles can be driven as easily between EU countries as within one country
prescribes minimum third-party liability insurance cover in EU countries
Choose translations of the previous link and adapted minimum amounts according to the Directive: (2010/C 332/1)

corktina

That doesn't say that a Company is obliged to cover a driver with third party Insurance no matter what. That is putting the onus on the driver to take out a minimum of third party insurance.

Dangel4x4

corktina wrote: »

That doesn't say that a Company is obliged to cover a driver with third party Insurance no matter what. That is putting the onus on the driver to take out a minimum of third party insurance.

EU Motor Insurance Directive 2009/103/EC:

(8) Such a guarantee agreement presupposes that all Community motor vehicles travelling in Community territory are covered by insurance. The national law of each Member State should, therefore, provide for the compulsory insurance of vehicles against civil liability, such insurance to be valid throughout Community territory.

(11)

...Steps should also be taken to ensure that due compensation is awarded to the victims of accidents caused by those vehicles not only abroad but also in the Member State in which the vehicle is normally based. For this purpose, Member States should treat the victims of accidents caused by those vehicles in the same way as victims of accidents caused by uninsured vehicles. Indeed, compensation to victims of accidents caused by uninsured vehicles should be paid by the compensation body of the Member State in which the accident took place. Where payments are made to victims of accidents caused by vehicles subject to the derogation, the compensation body should have a claim against the body of the Member State in which the vehicle is normally based....

Which might make it VERY messy if you're involved in an accident while driving around pretending to be resident in another state.

Article 3

Compulsory insurance of vehicles

Each Member State shall, subject to Article 5, take all appropriate measures to ensure that civil liability in respect of the use of vehicles normally based in its territory is covered by insurance.

The extent of the liability covered and the terms and conditions of the cover shall be determined on the basis of the measures referred to in the first paragraph.

Each Member State shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the contract of insurance also covers:

(a)


according to the law in force in other Member States, any loss or injury which is caused in the territory of those States;

(b)


any loss or injury suffered by nationals of Member States during a direct journey between two territories in which the Treaty is in force, if there is no national insurers’ bureau responsible for the territory which is being crossed; in such a case, the loss or injury shall be covered in accordance with the national laws on compulsory insurance in force in the Member State in whose territory the vehicle is normally based.

The insurance referred to in the first paragraph shall cover compulsorily both damage to property and personal injuries.

corktina

..and again , it doesn't say that a Company must honour the third party section of the policy no matter what.

Dangel4x4

corktina wrote: »

..and again , it doesn't say that a Company must honour the third party section of the policy no matter what.

Why don't you actually read the directive for yourself?

Article 3 of the directive: civil liability must be covered, ie. third party. The policy also has to cover liability in other member states. If you have an accident in another member state, the liability is met by MIBI or the equivalent who sorts it out with the insurer in the home country.

What else is not clear? What's your definition of "no matter what"?

ardmacha

once she's done that, she (as any other englander) would be free to come to ireland on holiday and drive her UK registered car here for (insurance permitting) up to 90 days at a time as long as she spends at least as much time (plus 1 day) in the UK. you wouldn't be able to drive the car at all though if you're working here.

If the OP owns a house here and continues to live in it then he would be considered to remain resident here and so would his wife. presumably the OP has an Irish reg car and should just continue driving this.

corktina

Dangel4x4 wrote: »

Why don't you actually read the directive for yourself?

Article 3 of the directive: civil liability must be covered, ie. third party. The policy also has to cover liability in other member states. If you have an accident in another member state, the liability is met by MIBI or the equivalent who sorts it out with the insurer in the home country.

What else is not clear? What's your definition of "no matter what"?

you miss the point. That directive does not say that should the policyholder default on the policy in some way, the Insurance Company must still honour the Third Party section of it. The directives I believe put the onus on the driver to have third party cover and direct that should a driver not be insured, there be a fund available for third parties damaged by uninsured drivers.

Dangel4x4

How?

If the driver is driving outside the terms of his policy (or doesn't have a policy) while in another member state, the insurance bureau (MIBI etc.) of the country he is visiting still has to foot the bill as mentioned in my previous post.

MIBI deals with it either way

If the guy is insured, MIBI pays out and recovers the money from his home country insurer.
If the guy is uninsured, MIBI pays out and you,me and every other idiot who pays for insurance in this country has to foot the bill.

corktina wrote: »

directives I believe put the onus on the driver to have third party cover and direct that should a driver not be insured, there be a fund available for third parties damaged by uninsured drivers.

The LAW says you have to have a minimum of third party. No insurance? You committed an offence.

In this country that law is the Road Traffic Act 1961 - that's how directives are implemented in each member state.

corktina

But that's not the point. The point is someone claimed it was EU law that an Insurance Company in the UK must honour the third party cover irrespective of whether the policy is void or not. Nothing that has been posted since has backed that up.

djimi

corktina wrote: »

But that's not the point. The point is someone claimed it was EU law that an Insurance Company in the UK must honour the third party cover irrespective of whether the policy is void or not. Nothing that has been posted since has backed that up.

To be honest, I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that an insurance company must honor the third party claim on any active policy? I dont have a link to back it up, and Im not going to be going searching for one.

The policy is still active, and the third party is not bound by any terms and conditions that the policy may contain. The insurer can void the fully comp portion of the policy to their hearts content, but if Im claiming off you as a third party then it is in no way my problem whether or not you are abiding by the terms of your policy; that is entirely between you and your insurer and they are free to pursue you how they see fit once they have sorted out my third party claim.

Dangel4x4

corktina wrote: »

But that's not the point. The point is someone claimed it was EU law that an Insurance Company in the UK must honour the third party cover irrespective of whether the policy is void or not. Nothing that has been posted since has backed that up.

Somebody ASKED if it was EU law, to which you came back with a smart answer rather than actually proving anything yourself. In fact you admitted you had no clue. :eek:

Noe Ancient Wreck wrote: »

Is it not an EU law rather than something implemented by Irish insurance companies?

corktina wrote: »

I don't know and by the looks of it, you don't either.

If you look at the booklet of terms and conditions that came with your policy there will be a clause called RTA Obligations or something similar. It will say that you, the policyholder, are obliged to repay any payments made by the insurance company which they would not have liable to pay if not for provisions of the Road Traffic Acts. ie. something they were forced to do by law.

An example of this off the top of my head would be an insurance company paying out to a third party involved in a crash with an unaccompanied learner driver... :rolleyes:

corktina

Common knowledge as concerns an Irish policy perhaps, but a UK one? This is what I queried and was told it is EU law, but no one can produce a EU directive that says that even though a policy is no void, an Insurer must pay a third party claim.

corktina

Dangel4x4 wrote: »

Somebody ASKED if it was EU law, to which you came back with a smart answer rather than actually proving anything yourself. In fact you admitted you had no clue. :eek:





If you look at the booklet of terms and conditions that came with your policy there will be a clause called RTA Obligations or something similar. It will say that you, the policyholder, are obliged to repay any payments made by the insurance company which they would not have liable to pay if not for provisions of the Road Traffic Acts. ie. something they were forced to do by law.

An example of this off the top of my head would be an insurance company paying out to a third party involved in a crash with an unaccompanied learner driver... :rolleyes:

What smart answer?...I don't know this and nor did the other guy...not to mention you.

Never mind off the top of your head, I asked to be shown the EU law that says an Insurance Co is liable to pay a third party claim even if, say, the policy has been voided.

djimi

corktina wrote: »

Common knowledge as concerns an Irish policy perhaps, but a UK one? This is what I queried and was told it is EU law, but no one can produce a EU directive that says that even though a policy is no void, an Insurer must pay a third party claim.

I dont even know where to start looking for an EU directive if Im honest.

The question you need to ask is whether or not an insurance company can void a policy and remove themselves from liability after a third party claim has been made on the policy. It is my understanding (and this is what I thought was common knowledge) that they cannot, and that at best they can pursue the policy holder for the money that was paid out to the third party, but so long as the policy was active when the third party made the claim, then they cannot refuse to pay out on the third party claim.

corktina

djimi wrote: »

I dont even know where to start looking for an EU directive if Im honest.

The question you need to ask is whether or not an insurance company can void a policy and remove themselves from liability after a third party claim has been made on the policy. It is my understanding (and this is what I thought was common knowledge) that they cannot, and that at best they can pursue the policy holder for the money that was paid out to the third party, but so long as the policy was active when the third party made the claim, then they cannot refuse to pay out on the third party claim.

Nor me. I don't think there is any doubt about liability on an open policy

djimi

But thats the point though, isnt it? So long as the policy has not been previously cancelled by the insurer, it will be considered to be an open policy at the time of the third party claim, even if it subsequently transpires that the policy holder has breached the T&Cs of the policy, which would void their comprehensive cover.

mgbgt1978

corktina wrote: »

I don't know and by the looks of it, you don't either. In my opinion, a policy is void once you are outside the terms and conditions of it. I don't see how it could be a Law. You have to have minimum third party cover under the Road Traffic Act (or whatever). If you go outside the T&C, the Company are entitled in my view to revoke the policy.

Corkinta, you have said that an earlier poster mentioned the word 'void'.

The only poster who used the word 'void' was yourself.....following the words 'in my opinion'

Dangel4x4

corktina wrote: »

What smart answer?...I don't know this

You're very sure of yourself for a fella who admits he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Noe Ancient Wreck wrote: »

Is it not an EU law rather than something implemented by Irish insurance companies?

<

---

Question.

You can tell it's a question because it has a question mark at the end of the sentence. Statements of fact don't end with a question mark in my experience.

corktina wrote: »

I don't know and by the looks of it, you don't either.

<

---

Smart answer.

:rolleyes:

But keep going anyway... I'm sure the thread will be closed when it's 6 or 7 pages long.

corktina

OK I'm going to leave it there, still going to wait with baited breath for someone to show me that the law in the UK is the same as the law here in this respect, which is the nub of the matter.

Dangel4x4

Tell ya what, the best thing you can do is go to the Legal Discussion forum and ask them to explain to you how EU directives are implemented in individual member states, and the effect that can have on things like the Road Traffic Act 1961 when it comes to things like insurance.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=633

corktina

corktina wrote: »

That doesn't say that a Company is obliged to cover a driver with third party Insurance no matter what. That is putting the onus on the driver to take out a minimum of third party insurance.

If you read it properly and read a few different websites like

http://www.borderpeople.info/index/commute/browse/browse-detail.htm?objId=5949

The EU Motor Insurance Directive 2009/103/EC is a fundamental element to the free movement of vehicles in the European Union. The Directive establishes a single market in the field of motor insurance. The Directive obliges all motor vehicles in the EU to be covered by compulsory third party insurance and ensures the abolition of border checks on insurance so that vehicles can be driven as easily between Member States as within one country.

All compulsory motor insurance policies should cover, on the basis of a single premium and during the whole term of the contract, the entire territory of the Union, including for any period in which the vehicle remains in other Member States during the term of the contract.

Then its pretty clear that the directive is referring to insurance companies and it forces them (of they like it or not) to provide the minimum level of cover for someone anywhere in the EU.

Failing to provide the cover is in violation of the free movement of goods and services within the EU and that's a big no no.

Marcusm

corktina wrote: »

But that's not the point. The point is someone claimed it was EU law that an Insurance Company in the UK must honour the third party cover irrespective of whether the policy is void or not. Nothing that has been posted since has backed that up.

If a policy is "void" then it doesn't exist, that is the meaning of that term. A policy may be "voidable" meaning the conditions under which the policy were issued are inappropriate - for example, material non disclosure. A voidable policy may be determined to be void when the issue becomes aware of the inappropriate conditions. Until such time as the insurer declares it void, as a matter of public policy, the insurer remains responsible and liable under the policy. Events occurring g before the date on which it is rendered void remain the responsibility and liability of the insurer. However, the insurer will generally be permitted to recover costs from the insured (ie policyholder).

When I am not on a phone, I can point you to the particular clauses although they are not quite expressed in the terms. If a third party was aware I advance of the non disclosure, I suspect they could not make a valid clkaim due to the principle of uberrima fides.

CiniO

corktina wrote: »

What smart answer?...I don't know this and nor did the other guy...not to mention you.

Never mind off the top of your head, I asked to be shown the EU law that says an Insurance Co is liable to pay a third party claim even if, say, the policy has been voided.

If the policy has been voided (insured person was notified that his insurance policy was cancelled) then insurer is not liable for anything.

But the thing is, that no insurer in the EU can put a condition limiting amount of time that car can be driven abroad.

Therefore, no policy will be voided based on fact that someone drove it abroad for say 5 months which is more than 90 days someone mentioned.

djimi

The 90 day or whatever time frame refers to the length of time that comprehensive cover is offered abroad does it not?

Henry Ford III

CiniO wrote: »

If the policy has been voided (insured person was notified that his insurance policy was cancelled) then insurer is not liable for anything.

But the thing is, that no insurer in the EU can put a condition limiting amount of time that car can be driven abroad.

Therefore, no policy will be voided based on fact that someone drove it abroad for say 5 months which is more than 90 days someone mentioned.

You're making that up.

If the policy says the maximum duration of cover outside of Ireland is 90 days it's safe to assume it's not put there for a laugh.

Marcusm

Extract from FAQs sextion of Insurance Ireland webiste (representative body for insurance companies). The final sentence is the acceptance that there is always the legal minimum cover provided.


"Is there anything I need to do if I want to take my car abroad?

Firstly, you should contact your insurer and advise them that you wish to take your car abroad. Normal terms and conditions of motor policies allow a policyholder to take his/her car abroad for up to 31 days to another EU member state for no extra charge. Your existing cover can be extended for stays of up to 60 or 90 days duration but you may have to pay an additional fee for this cover. After your extended cover expires, you have the minimum cover required by law in each country visited (i.e. no comprehensive or fire and theft) until your policy is due for renewal."

The extension of liability is in section 62 RTA 1961 as amended up to 2009; the following is a new subparpagrah inserted by SI 248 of 2008 and basically provides that an approved policy of insurance (the only type applicable to legal use of a car) must contain the following terms.

"(cc) The liability of the insurer extends, in addition to the negligent use of the mechanically propelled vehicle in the State, to the negligent use of the vehicle in the designated territories according to the law relating to compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of mechanically propelled vehicles in force in those territories or to the extent required by this Part, whichever is the greater"

In relation to "void" or "voidable", the relevant section has always provided that the liability of the insurance always extends from the date of issue of the policy and that it only ceases 7 days after the insurance company has provided notice to the policyholder that the policy is being cancelled - this is why an insurance company is liable for costs even where it discovers after the event that the policyholder has failed to disclose or has lied etc. It can cancel the policy prospectively not retrospectively where 3rd parties are concerned.

Henry Ford III

Henry Ford III wrote: »

You're making that up.

If the policy says the maximum duration of cover outside of Ireland is 90 days it's safe to assume it's not put there for a laugh.

An insurance company can say what they want but they are over ruled by EU law.

Henry Ford III

Noe Ancient Wreck wrote: »

An insurance company can say what they want but they are over ruled by EU law.

Only after a successful court action.

CiniO

Henry Ford III wrote: »

You're making that up.

If the policy says the maximum duration of cover outside of Ireland is 90 days it's safe to assume it's not put there for a laugh.

No insurer can legally put such clause into any policy relating to third party cover. Not anywhere in EU anyway.

They can limit the time of cover abroad for fire, theft, own car damage, windscreen, etc...
But they can not put any time limitations to third party cover based on time car is being driven abroad.
I'm not making it up.
If you don't believe me, find me any car policy stating that third party cover abroad is limited to certain time. I know already you won't be able to.

macplaxton

corktina wrote: »

still going to wait with baited breath

You're not catching fish. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/bated :P

Any Her Maj's Government says:

All UK vehicle insurance provides the minimum third party cover to drive in other EU countries.

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/driving-abroad

It's an EU thing valid for the full year. Insurers can't word their way of it. The 30/35/45/60/90/180 days stuff that an insurer spouts on about is over and above the minimum cover (or to the same cover as you have in the home country)

In fact, I think it is for all EU member countries + Norway & Switzerland (including Liechtenstein). Well it says that on the back of my UK cert of insurance.

Henry Ford III

CiniO wrote: »

No insurer can legally put such clause into any policy relating to third party cover. Not anywhere in EU anyway.

They can limit the time of cover abroad for fire, theft, own car damage, windscreen, etc...
But they can not put any time limitations to third party cover based on time car is being driven abroad.
I'm not making it up.
If you don't believe me, find me any car policy stating that third party cover abroad is limited to certain time. I know already you won't be able to.

Must have a look.......