I have a fully comp. insurance policy for my first car.
I own a 2nd car, and have been told by my insurance company I can drive my 2nd car, or any other car third party.
I have phoned 3 times to check this and they are 100% convinced it\'s fine for my to drive my second car third party even though there is no other insurance covering it.
Is this right? It seems almost to good to be true? (especially since my send car is group17)
|
Make sure you get that in writing - it's not the advice we are usually given. The standard line is that you are only covered if the second car is already insured under a specific policy.
Even if true, watch out - 'driving' only means driving. The moment you got out of the car and popped into a shop you would not be driving and the car would be uninsured.
You would also have difficulty taxing a car that was not specifically mentioned on your insurance certificate.
|
|
|
|
i thought you can drive any other car that is not owned or hired to you & even then its only on a third party basis, as Cliff said get it in writing but dont hold your breath mate.
|
Time to change insurers or get the specific use of this car in writing from your current ones.
Beelzebub will be fastening his iceskates before the latter happens.....
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your replies. I've now phoned my company for the fourth time. They gave me the same advice, but then checked with the supervisor- then apologised for their mistake and confirmed what you say, which is I can drive any car PROVIDED ITS NOT OWNED BY ME.
HOWEVER, I've decided that my girlfriend will now become the registered owner/keeper. They tell me this way, I will still be able to drive the second car third party. This also almost seems to good to be true, but does seem to fit with what they tell me and all the small print.
|
And in the small print you will find that the other car needs to be covered by it's own policy so it's not going to work simply transferring it into your gf's name.
I ran two cars for a while and found Norwich Union Direct one of the few companies that would apply my full NCB to both car policies.
|
|
|
Not formal advice, but ...
You will be able to drive the car; but she will still have to insure it if it is legally to be used on the road - any car must have a policy of insurance when being used, which includes being parked.
Similarly, she won't be able to tax it. If your girlfriend is the registered owner/keeper of the car, but not the main driver, then you are in breach of your common law duty to disclose all material facts to the insurance comapny. In theory, this means the insurance company could refuse to pay out, although you would not be liable to criminal prosecution.
This is mitigated by the insurance ombudsman's policy of ensuring that ambiguities in policies are fairly and reasonably interpreted favouring the individual who doesn't have the backing of teams of lawyers to interpret the policy, unlike the insurer.
Furthermore, if the car is used without being taxed or insured, your girlfriend will be criminally responsible as the registered keeper. Finally of course, even if you do make a claim and it is successful, you will be covered only in respect of the third party's loss, not your own.
|
|
|
If your GF does not take out her own insurance for it, then
(a) how do you tax it
(b) it will be uninsured and unlawful as soon as you step outside it if parked in a public place.
(c) you will constantly be getting stopped by the ANPR camera vans if/when they're in your area.
(d) If/when you get hitched, the policy usually says not owned by you or spouse
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your detailed answers.
a) The car has 6 months TAX remaining, and I hope to sell it before renewal so this won't be a problem
b) I'm happy for the car to be driven 3rd party, as it only worth £2K, and really I only want to drive it once a fortnight, and when someone comes to test drive it.
c)It concerns me that my insurance company (A large, well known one) is not gving me accurate advice. Their latest is that they are adamant I can drive the car 3rd party if I change the owner/keeper to my GF. They did not tell me that I could be in trouble for driving the car if it's not covered by a policy of it's own, or if my GF is not the main driver. I will speak to them again tomorrow.
|
Pete, no doubt you are talking to an Indian call centre, so please make sure they understand and let us know how you get on.
|
I think the bit about the insurance co requiring that the car is insured is an urban myth - I have certainly never read such a condition. I agree that the vehicle's owner may be committing an offence by not having it insured, but the driver isn't, as their insurance co covers the statutory third party risks.
I have also never seen "not owned by spouse" either. Only time I have seen mention of spouse is on named drivers when they sometimes say Policyholder and spouse, but don't name the spouse.
There is a lot if mis-information, and the only way to find the real answers is to read the small print of your own policy.
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
I am inclined to agree with Richard W.
The question has been widely aired before on this site. I cannot find the threads at the moment , but will look later.
The question of driving vs in charge (ie parking and leaving vehicle) has been raised but without satisfactory conclusion I believe. Historically I believed that you could be deemed to be in charge if the keys were in your posession. (eg drunk in the pub) altho I would guess that prosecutions were rare.
Someone raised the question about witholding material information from the insurer, however, who would be 'guilty' of this?
Provided that the vehicle is genuinely owned (and paid for ) by girlfriend what is the issue. However the correspondence here will go some way to showing that the car is not genuinely owned by the girlfriend.
One further question remains, does a vehicle have to have current insurance for the RFT licence to be valid?
This subject always seems to generate more questions tha answers!
pmh (was peter)
|
|
The other car has to be specifically fully insured in someones name and they will highly probably have to be the official owner of the vehicle. Regards Peter
|
The only circumstances where I have encountered genuine cover of more than one car on the same policy (apart from fleets perhaps) is the kind of classic policy that covers a collection of cars.
These usually permit any number of cars to be included within the overall total mileage permitted. The premium I recollect was barely more than that for a single car, but allowed for the possibility of them all being at risk of theft even though only one was actually in use at a time.
Even so, every car had to have its own insurance certificate for tax purposes.
|
I've just phoned up the DVLA to ask their advice. It seems that the second car does not need to have an insuranc policy of its own to be driven on the road, if my insurance policy of my first car says I will be covered third party for any car not belonging to me, then, provided the second car now does belong to my GF, then I will be covered. I didn't ask about taxing the car when that runs out.
They also said if there are two cars in the family, then of course I need to tell the insurance company, and this will increase the premium on my first car.
No the cars aren't Citroens, they're a Honda , and a BMW, so everything should be logical right!
Also, yes, the insurance company is now working from India.
|
Are you speaking to the insurance company itself or a broker ? Either way, you really need to change who you're speaking with.
You have a duty to disclose any fact material to the risk. If you are not sure whether or not a fact is material, then you should disclose it anyway. The fact that you know that you will drive the other car occasionally and have registered in your GF's name to enable this is material.
Were you to have an accident, and were the insurance company to work this out, then whilst you would be legally insured the insurance company would have the right to recover their losses from you.
Not the sort of thing I'd risk, personally.
As someone else said recently, possibly M.M., I am constantly amazed that people going to get insurance think they have got away with something because the insurance company didn't specifically ask. They don't have to, the duty to disclose is yours, they have no duty to discover.
Also, and you need to check your own policy, you'll probably find that the DOC extension is phrased as "insured to drive another vehicle" and that being in charge of it is not relevant. i.e. if you get out of it, its not insured.
|
Richard queried the 'and spouse' bit of driving other cars.
From my policy document (my 'bold')
www.morethan.com/document/pdf/motorpoli.pdf
B YOUR COVER WHILE DRIVING ANY OTHER CAR
This policy also covers you against claims for costs you may have to pay as a result of:
+ causing injury to or the death of anyone; or
+ the damage you cause to another person?s property (we will pay up to £20,000,000 for any claim or claims arising from one incident).
You are covered while driving any other car only if all the following apply:
+ You are 25 years of age or older.
+ You are driving with the owners permission.
+ You are not entitled to make a claim for the damage under any other policy of insurance.
+ The car is not owned by (or hired under a hire purchase agreement by or leased to) you or your husband or wife.
+ The car is being driven in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, the
Isle of Man or the Channel Islands.
|
I stand corrected....
Mine doesn't say that though!
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
I'm amazed. Yesterday I would have sworn blind that the other car had to be insured. Having just scoured my insurance policy down to the fine print there is no reference at all to the other car being insured. My policy does not state that it excludes cars owned by family members (so I can drive my wifes car on my insurance). However, in this case, transferring the car to your gf is clearly against the spirit of the contract (unless it will truly be her car and she will use it regularly) and so I suspect that were you 'found out' you would be in a whole heap of doo-doo.
|
|
Mark, I am speaking to the insurance company directly (at the call centre in India). I have gone to great lengths explaining to them exactly what I want to do- In fact I have phoned them 4 times, specifically to find out what I can and can't do. All I want is to drive my GFs car third party, on my insurance. They assure me it's fine. I will phone them again later to ensure I have disclosed everything that may be relevant
The whole business of driving my GFs car third party on my insurance seems to be such a grey area to everyone other than the people at my insurance compant, that I am almost tempted to forget it, and pay for an extension to my first policy which will specifically cover the second car while I'm trying to sell it ( which they also offer) . That way, I will at least have total piece of mind- albeit for £30 per month extra.
|
|
As a minimum get it in writing.
|
I looked up my policy (online if anyone else is with Norwich Union here
).
Must admit I can't see the clause relating to the other car needing to be insured separately either and yet I always believed it to be so.
|
I'm amazed too. But even if it really is true that you are insured to DRIVE another car not owned by you, that surely cannot include coverage when the car is parked on a public road?
Is there any limit to how many other cars you can have "covered" in this way at the same time?
|
Is there any limit to how many other cars you can have "covered" in this way at the same time?
Errrm, you can only drive one at once????
|
Is there any limit to how many other cars you can have "covered" in this way at the same time? Errrm, you can only drive one at once????
That's my point - if the others were just parked in the street they couldn't possibly be covered, therefore "driving" can only mean actually driving. So the cover is useless - the car(s)would be uninsured the moment you got out.
|
|
|
|
My conclusion from all this, and my conversations with the insurance company, reading the small print and talking to the DVLA, is that I could switch my second car to the ownership of my GF, then drive it third party. The car would not need a policy of its own. I would need to declare that there are two cars in the family which would increase the premium. I would probably have difficulty getting the car taxed when that runs out. I would also have a nagging doubt in my mind as to whether, for some reason, if I ever had a crash, there might me some technicality that the insurance company used to wriggle out of paying up.
Finally, I've decided to pay £35 per month to have my second car specifically added to my policy, which Norwich Union allow if you're trying to sell it. Despite the cost, I at least now have total peace of mind.
|
|
|
pete203 - as I said elsewhere >> Remember - A common mistake is to assume that "registered keeper" is equivalent to "legal owner". Not necessarily so. >> So the fact you transfer registration to your GF does not make her the owner.
Otherwise, you are right - you can drive another car not owned by you (or spouse if that is what your policy says) according to the conditions laid out (usually that the owner must give permission, and the cover you get is 3rd party legal minimum).
I do not know how you would make sure that the person who gives you permission is actually the owner. I also believe it is the driver's responsibility to make sure that the car is roadworthy whilst in charge of the car.
|
I have just checked on the DVLA site
www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles/obligations.htm
It is clear from there that the "vehicle" must be insured - note, not just the driver. So, before your GF can let you drive her car in a public place, she must insure the car.
|
It is clear from there that the "vehicle" must be insured
Yes, but it is insured under the 'driving other cars' extension. The DVLA site does not say that the vehicle has to have its own separate insurance. The site doesn't attempt to deal with that question.
|
Is not the problem that there are in fact two issues here, usually confused by the comprehensive nature of an ordinary insurance policy?
1) It is clear that a "vehicle" must be insured if it is on a public road. Even if parked , it must have insurance.
2) It is a legal requirement that the driver is covered for third party risks. That is cover on the driver, not the vehicle.
So whilst it may be true that someone is covered to drive someone else's car, that does not provide insurance on the car when the driver is not in the car. (As I said before, if any car were covered even in the driver's absense, then that one policy would insure every parked car in the kingdom if their owner's gave permission)
|
|
The car must be insured to be on the road - agreed. You will have third party cover if driving the car under your insurance - so your liability would be covered in an accident. However, as the car is not properly insured to be on the road I expect that your insurance company would try to recover their costs from the owner of the un-insured car? Just a thought.
|
I think we have got there, Adrian. You have rounded off what I was trying to say.
So the answer to the original question is, yes, it would be legal (as in Mr Plod stops you and asks to see your insurance certificate) but that is not necessarily the same thing as the insurance company paying up quietly and not trying to get its money back from you.
Again, two aspects often confused when asking "Am I insured to ..."
|
|
|
|
