Am I insured?

willdill

Ok here the problem i bought a new car yesterday went to switch the insurance from my old car to the new one but there was a problem because there was a diffrent engine in it.So the insurance person says look youe insurer is closed at the minute wont be open till tomorrow ring back tomorrow to change over.i take the car to the shop get pulled told 10 days to produce.Am i covered.Will the new policy they send out the the same dates as on my original policy or from the day after i got pulled and changed it.its 3rd party if that helps.Am i F***ed

Stheno

willdill wrote: »

Ok here the problem i bought a new car yesterday went to switch the insurance from my old car to the new one but there was a problem because there was a diffrent engine in it.So the insurance person says look youe insurer is closed at the minute wont be open till tomorrow ring back tomorrow to change over.i take the car to the shop get pulled told 10 days to produce.Am i covered.Will the new policy they send out the the same dates as on my original policy or from the day after i got pulled and changed it.its 3rd party if that helps.Am i F***ed

Did you take the car to the shop before they reopened to transfer your insurance

willdill

Stheno wrote: »

Did you take the car to the shop before they reopened to transfer your insurance

yes but if i tell the insurance company to backdate it to yesterday would that work.

Liam McPoyle

willdill wrote: »

Ok here the problem i bought a new car yesterday went to switch the insurance from my old car to the new one but there was a problem because there was a diffrent engine in it.So the insurance person says look youe insurer is closed at the minute wont be open till tomorrow ring back tomorrow to change over.i take the car to the shop get pulled told 10 days to produce.Am i covered.Will the new policy they send out the the same dates as on my original policy or from the day after i got pulled and changed it.its 3rd party if that helps.Am i F***ed

What do you mean there was a problem with the difference in the engine?

I presume you are insured through a brokers?

Did you give them the registration number of the new car when you spoke to them?

willdill

Saul T Nutzz wrote: »

What do you mean there was a problem with the difference in the engine?

I presume you are insured through a brokers?

Did you give them the registration number of the new car when you spoke to them?

yep the car has a new engine.i bought it as a 1.4 it was originaly a 2.0 i went to the guard the other day about this and they sai no its registered as a 1.4 but its coming up 2.0 with the insurance company.anyway the broker said the insurance people were shut and cant speak to them till tomorrow so it wasnt switched over.

Walter2016

Tell the broker about the issue. They'll get insurance co to issue the policy for the correct date.
You may need to sign a document to say that you did not have an accident that day.

Sue Pa Key Pa

It's not as simple as that. If there is a major modification such as an engine change, your insurers may insist on an engineers report before giving you cover.

Unless your broker had authority to bind cover on behalf of your insurer, it won't be backdated

willdill

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

It's not as simple as that. If there is a major modification such as an engine change, your insurers may insist on an engineers report before giving you cover.

Unless your broker had authority to bind cover on behalf of your insurer, it won't be backdated

Would the insurance from my other car cover me

degsie

willdill wrote: »

Would the insurance from my other car cover me

Unless someone on here has direct access to your insurance policy there is no of knowing. You NEED to talk to your insurer.

Stheno

willdill wrote: »

Would the insurance from my other car cover me

Generally once you own a car having bought it, no.

vandriver

If you are talking about driving other cars,this only applies to cars not owned by you.

Sue Pa Key Pa

willdill wrote: »

Would the insurance from my other car cover me

If you have driving of other cars cover and the log book is not in your name, you 'might' get away with it.

You need to clarify the timeframe from your original post. You bought the car yesterday. You spoke to your insurance person, but your insurance company was closed. How is that? What day/time did you speak to your man?When were you stopped?

willdill

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

If you have driving of other cars cover and the log book is not in your name, you 'might' get away with it.

You need to clarify the timeframe from your original post. You bought the car yesterday. You spoke to your insurance person, but your insurance company was closed. How is that? What day/time did you speak to your man?When were you stopped?

car bought yesterday rang broker at 5 today.axa was closed he said.drove car to shop tonight got pulled.

Skyfarm

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

If you have driving of other cars cover and the log book is not in your name, you 'might' get away with it.?

Unless the seller still had their insurance on the car ,the above won't happen
you have to have the other car insured

Henry Ford III

I think you'll be fortunate to dodge this bullet OP.

You should not have driven the car at all without confirmation of cover.

Gen.Zhukov

I can't get my head around some of this at all.

willdill wrote: »

Ok here the problem i bought a new car yesterday went to switch the insurance from my old car to the new one but there was a problem because there was a diffrent engine in it.So the insurance person says look youe insurer is closed at the minute wont be open till tomorrow ring back tomorrow to change over.i take the car to the shop get pulled told 10 days to produce.Am i covered.Will the new policy they send out the the same dates as on my original policy or from the day after i got pulled and changed it.its 3rd party if that helps.Am i F***ed

willdill wrote: »

yep the car has a new engine.i bought it as a 1.4 it was originaly a 2.0 i went to the guard the other day about this and they sai no its registered as a 1.4 but its coming up 2.0 with the insurance company.anyway the broker said the insurance people were shut and cant speak to them till tomorrow so it wasnt switched over.

You bought the car yesterday and left it to 17.00 hrs today to change over insurance.
You talked to guard about this sometime before yesterday and the buying of the car. Did he tell you it's coming up on insurance co's records as a 2.0ltr ? Can he do that ? I didn't know the guards had access to Ins co's records

Dunno fella, it's all a bit fishy to me. Tbh, most people would have sorted out the insurance changeover before collecting the car, which is no help to you having being pulled already, I know.

Akrasia

1.618 wrote: »

I can't get my head around some of this at all.







You bought the car yesterday and left it to 17.00 hrs today to change over insurance.
You talked to guard about this sometime before yesterday and the buying of the car. Did he tell you it's coming up on insurance co's records as a 2.0ltr ? Can he do that ? I didn't know the guards had access to Ins co's records

Dunno fella, it's all a bit fishy to me. Tbh, most people would have sorted out the insurance changeover before collecting the car, which is no help to you having being pulled already, I know.

Some people drive a long way to look at a car before buying it. If they buy the car but ownership isn't exchanged yet, they'll be covered by their own driving other cars clause.

Gen.Zhukov

Akrasia wrote: »

Some people drive a long way to look at a car before buying it. If they buy the car but ownership isn't exchanged yet, they'll be covered by their own driving other cars clause.

The other/new car has to be an insured car by someone. 'Driving other cars' does not mean you can drive any car irrespective of it's status. What if the seller cancels their insurance the second the car is gone.

Special Circumstances

1.618 wrote: »

The other/new car has to be an insured car by someone. 'Driving other cars' does not mean you can drive any car irrespective of it's status. What if the seller cancels their insurance the second the car is gone.

Akrasia

1.618 wrote: »

The other/new car has to be an insured car by someone. 'Driving other cars' does not mean you can drive any car irrespective of it's status. What if the seller cancels their insurance the second the car is gone.

Depends on your policy.

My policy lets me drive any car as long as I don't own it and I have permission to drive it. It doesn't have to be insured by someone else.

Skyfarm

Akrasia wrote: »

Depends on your policy.

My policy lets me drive any car as long as I don't own it and I have permission to drive it. It doesn't have to be insured by someone else.

is it garage plates you have?

i honestly believe there is no normal policy that allows a person to drive a car that isn't there's and doesn't have the owner own policy..

If that's the case,i could buy a 1ltr fiesta and use insurance to drive a 3.ltr beamer.

i could be easily wrong

Sue Pa Key Pa

Skyfarm wrote: »

If that's the case,i could buy a 1ltr fiesta and use insurance to drive a 3.ltr beamer.

i could be easily wrong

You are incorrect, but the example you've given is why some insurers have closed that loophole and the rest will follow soon enough

Gen.Zhukov

Skyfarm wrote: »

is it garage plates you have?

i honestly believe there is no normal policy that allows a person to drive a car that isn't there's and doesn't have the owner own policy..

If that's the case,i could buy a 1ltr fiesta and use insurance to drive a 3.ltr beamer.

i could be easily wrong

I looked at various Ins Co's sites and I can't actually find any statement to confirm what I thought.

Judging by post #20, it's been done do death around here so I'm off :pac::)

coylemj

The reference to Groundhog Day is because there was an urban myth doing the rounds which claimed that in order to be covered under 'driving other cars' that the borrowed car needed to have a policy of it's own and this was repeated here over and over even though it was not true.

However...... some insurance companies have now started to include this in their Ts & Cs so you need to check your own policy to see if the condition is there. I believe it's to stop people borrowing old bangers which have been laid up by the owner because his policy has lapsed so (I'm guessing here) the insurance companies are wary because the car may not be properly maintained.

As to the OP's situation, when you make a change to a policy like changing car, the new cert. will have a start date and time corresponding to the exact time you phoned them to make the change, they will not issue a backdated cert.

Marcusm

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

It's not as simple as that. If there is a major modification such as an engine change, your insurers may insist on an engineers report before giving you cover.

Unless your broker had authority to bind cover on behalf of your insurer, it won't be backdated

It's clear from his original post that the broker did not in any way present him as having cover. The existence of a material question vis a vis a modification to the car meant that cover could not be confirmed. I can't believe that the OP even thought he was covered.

As regards the OP's suggestion of backdating, don't even ask - if for no other reason that the fact that it would be an offence.

Marcusm

Akrasia wrote: »

Some people drive a long way to look at a car before buying it. If they buy the car but ownership isn't exchanged yet, they'll be covered by their own driving other cars clause.

The latter part is complete rubbish; if they have paid for the car and drive it away, ownership of the car has changed. The mere fact that the VOC has not been updated or sent off is irrelevant; it's neither proof nor evidence of ownership.

NUTLEY BOY

Marcusm wrote: »

The latter part is complete rubbish; if they have paid for the car and drive it away, ownership of the car has changed. The mere fact that the VOC has not been updated or sent off is irrelevant; it's neither proof nor evidence of ownership.

I think that view is the right and reasonable one. In broad terms, legal ownership of property is not always clear cut.

In relation to OP's position I think the better view is that he drove a car whilst uninsured. It may be that the broker could resolve it for him with the insurers if there was binding authority. Even if the vehicle was outside the scope of the binding authority the insurers may be persuaded to consider themselves on cover as at the date of the traffic stop.

AFAIK insurers are forbidden from back dating a certificate of motor insurance. However, if they are prepared to accommodate the broker can they issue a letter of indemnity instead and thus satisfy the Gardai that OP was lawfully insured.

Marcusm

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

I think that view is the right and reasonable one. In broad terms, legal ownership of property is not always clear cut.

In relation to OP's position I think the better view is that he drove a car whilst uninsured. It may be that the broker could resolve it for him with the insurers if there was binding authority. Even if the vehicle was outside the scope of the binding authority the insurers may be persuaded to consider themselves on cover as at the date of the traffic stop.

AFAIK insurers are forbidden from back dating a certificate of motor insurance. However, if they are prepared to accommodate the broker can they issue a letter of indemnity instead and thus satisfy the Gardai that OP was lawfully insured.

Such an accommodation would be the epitome of moral hazard.

Henry Ford III

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

I think that view is the right and reasonable one. In broad terms, legal ownership of property is not always clear cut.

In relation to OP's position I think the better view is that he drove a car whilst uninsured. It may be that the broker could resolve it for him with the insurers if there was binding authority. Even if the vehicle was outside the scope of the binding authority the insurers may be persuaded to consider themselves on cover as at the date of the traffic stop.

AFAIK insurers are forbidden from back dating a certificate of motor insurance. However, if they are prepared to accommodate the broker can they issue a letter of indemnity instead and thus satisfy the Gardai that OP was lawfully insured.

Why would they do that though?

"Any chance you'd backdate a cover note to cover me for last week? I know there was no confirmation of cover, and the new car was a bit dodgy because of an engine upgrade......".

millington

Walter2016 wrote: »

Tell the broker about the issue. They'll get insurance co to issue the policy for the correct date.
You may need to sign a document to say that you did not have an accident that day.

You can't possibly backdate insurance, there is no way that would work.


Driving of other cars won't cover it either since the OP owns the car. Irrelevant of whether the logbook has reached Shannon yet.

The OP wasn't insured. Simple.

Skyfarm wrote: »

is it garage plates you have?

i honestly believe there is no normal policy that allows a person to drive a car that isn't there's and doesn't have the owner own policy..

If that's the case,i could buy a 1ltr fiesta and use insurance to drive a 3.ltr beamer.

i could be easily wrong

You are wrong. A lot of companies don't require the other car to be insured. Since the other policy has no relevance to the driver, it makes sense.

NUTLEY BOY

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Why would they do that though?

"Any chance you'd backdate a cover note to cover me for last week? I know there was no confirmation of cover, and the new car was a bit dodgy because of an engine upgrade......".

They could do it for commercial and or administrative reasons especially if there was genuine misapprehension about the technicalities or there was administrative ineptitude on the parts of the brokers and or the underwriters the effect of which has been to land the client in to inadvertent legal strife. Such accomodations can happen.

Incidentally, if the OP can raise reasonable doubts based on the preceding point he may well be acquitted in the District Court despite the firmer judicial attitude to driving without insurance. For clarity, it is possible to have no valid cover in place at the time of the traffic stop but to be acquitted of the offence on grounds of reasonable doubt about culpability.

You cannot backdate a certificate of motor insurance. You probably cannot backdate a cover note either. That is why I suggested a letter of indemnity if the underwriters were of the view that they would have been prepared to accept the risk anyhow.

That said, OP should not have taken to the road without being 100% sure of cover being in place. He will do well to get out of this one.