Atlantic Dawn wrote: » Some insurers insist on the other car having insurance on it, check with your insurer. When I am driving other cars I bring my policy with me, you can always bring your own disc and policy but if the car is unattended it won't help.
blackbox wrote: » As above, just Bring your cert with you. Whilst OK to drive, It may be an offence to park the car in a public place.
extra-ordinary_ wrote: » Won't I still be committing an offence of not displaying a valid insurance disc?
User1998 wrote: » Who are you insured with that doesn’t require the car to have an active policy on it?
coylemj wrote: » The general answer to your question is: Anyone other than Aviva and Liberty. They are currently the only insurers who insist that in order for your 'driving other cars' to cover you, there must be an active policy in place for the car you borrow.
Uncle Pierre wrote: » Where would it actually say that? Am asking because I'm with Aviva myself and am looking at my insurance cert right now. It says: ...... There's no mention of how somebody else would have to hold a policy for the other vehicle as well....
Uncle Pierre wrote: » Jaysus. Never knew that, so sincere thanks for what could be some crucial information some day. I always check the cert each year to make sure all's in order, but don't think I've ever actually read the full policy booklet. Am probably not alone in that either! It doesn't happen very often that I drive another car, but I'll definitely be conscious of this whenever it occurs in future, so thanks again.
Uncle Pierre wrote: » My wife's car insurance has been with Liberty for the past few years. She was in a minor collision at one stage (no injuries), where another party drove into her. Her car was smashed up a bit at the back, had to be towed away, and was off the road for about two weeks. It wasn't in roadworthy condition during this time. She used my car regularly during those weeks. I have her as a named driver anyway, but if I hadn't, does this mean her insurance wouldn't actually have covered her in those circumstances? Again, just in case anything similar ever arises in future.
coylemj wrote: » I don't work in the insurance business, I'm just used to reading policy documents to help clear up ambiguities and sometimes to debunk urban myths in this forum. The answer to most questions about cover can be found in the policy document. We do have an insurance insider who contributes to this forum, he is very helpful when dealing with queries around claims handling. According to my reading of the current Liberty policy document, your wife's policy would not have covered her to drive your car as her own car was not (by your reckoning) in a roadworthy condition. Because one of the conditions for 'Driving other cars' in the Liberty policy document is: 9.you still have the insured vehicle and it holds a valid NCT and is in a roadworthy condition That's on P.30 of the current Liberty policy document. What I recommend is that you download the policy document on the day you renew your policy because that document will apply to your policy for the following 12 months. Most companies only show the current pollicy document on their website, Axa being an exception, they have 12 versions online, going back to 2013.
Del2005 wrote: » Another issue with a spouse driving a spouse's car with the "driving other cars" extension is that one of the requirements is that you don't own or have any interest in the car.
Del2005 wrote: » Spouses are generally considered to jointly own everything....
(1) A married woman shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, be capable of acquiring, holding, and disposing by will or otherwise, of any real or personal property as her separate property, in the same manner as if she were a feme sole, without the intervention of any trustee.
coylemj wrote: » Who's 'requirements'? Liberty covers you to drive other cars, provided that ...the other car is not owned by your spouse / partner/cohabitant or employer or hired to them under a hire- purchase or lease agreement; While Axa has these conditions ... you do not own the Private car or you have not hired the Private car under a hire-purchase agreement, contract of lease hire or contract hire; the Private car is not owned by your employer or hired to them under a hire-purchase or lease agreement; If (as you claim) there is a general condition that your spouse's 'driving other cars' cover will not apply if they drive your car because they have an 'insurable interest', why doesn't Axa do like Liberty and explicitly exclude them? Disagree. If joint ownership applied across the board, a married man or woman would need their spouse's consent to sell their car or any other property. And as a principle of law, it didn't even apply to the most valuable asset in most marriages - the family home. Because prior to 1976, if the house was registered in the husband's name, he could sell it without any reference to his wife - so much for joint ownership! This was fixed by the passage of the Family Home Protection Act 1976. There was once a principle that a married man owned all of his wife's possessions but that concept was abolished by the Married Woman's Property Act 1882 which gave a married woman the right to buy, own and sell property in her own right. The effect of that act is that anything which a married woman buys in her own name is her sole property, the same as if she was a single woman - there is no automatic joint ownership with her husband.
Akrasia wrote: » At what point do you ‘own’ a vehicle?
