A friend of mine works as a shop assistant for a large national chain. Recently both she and other colleagues at the store at which they work have been regularly asked to travel to other stores at distances up to 100 miles from home.
The company is paying a small mileage rate to cover petrol but have implied that the journey can be done on normal "social domestic and pleasure" insurance.
My employer insists on any employee doing a similar journey in a private car holding business insurance cover.
Can anyone confirm if my friend is insured for these journeys?
|
I awlays thought that commuting was covered under social domestic and pleasure, but not real business travel, i.e. going out to see clients at various locations, and especially carrying goods.
Good question, I'll be interested to see what the panel thinks...
|
The trouble is the actual definitions vary from one company to another. SD&P does normally include some idea of commuting which is "to and from one permanent place". Clearly travelling to more than one store would be exluded from this and therefore they would not be insured. It can get considerably worse if they carry anybody else or any equipment, materials or stock.
Most employers will insist on business use simply because of this difficulty with SD&P cover - they usually also require proof. Your friends employers seems to be behaving recklessly and irresponsibly. I wonder if it is the company or just one idiot.
If she has a usage definition of SD&P only, then it is extremely unlikely that it will cover the use she requires. However an increasing number of companies are classifying the use as SD&P and personal business use.
She needs to dig out her policy and actually read it, or ring her insurer and explain the situation. If they say it is ok, then get them to confirm it in writing.
Out of spite, I'd ask the employer to put it in writing. I doubt he will, but it should shut up on a subject about which he clearly knows nothing.
|
I'd ask the employer to put it in writing out of caution rather than spite. That way, if anything does happen, there is a glimmer of hope that the employer may pay up.
I would also be surprised if this is SD&P use. And as there is a criminal liability for driving uninsured, I'd be very cautious.
Mrs P's former employer took such a strict view of the matter that staff visiting other premises were required to hire a car on expenses to do so, even if they had their own car and had insured it for business use themselves. Sadly, they were so stingy that they would only allow the cheapest cars - typically a Pug 106 for 4 adults. Now, nothing against the 106, but these trips could be 200 miles and the 106s were generally less capable than the employee's own cars.
Employee turnover there was quite high, IIRC. No idea why.
|
|
|
|
I am in a similar boat and I procrastinated on it for a while - some people said I didn't need it because [set of reasonable arguments], others said I did because [set of reasonable arguments]. So I decided to just get Business Class 1 and be done with it. My insurance company charged me £17 (policy had only just stared) which I thought was well worth it for the peace of mind.
Fortunately for me, the situation I am in is official - I knew it before I took the job so could sort out insurance cover and this sort of thing is part of my employer's core business - so they know about it.
On the other hand, my girlfriend has been asked to deliver things to customers in the past (just an envelope to someone's house) and (pedantic as it makes me sound) this is business travel. It's only a mile and a half up the road, and it's only an envelope, but it's business travel. I am certain she would get the same response your friend did, which is "don't worry about it", dismissing her as a trouble-maker.
All very well until she has an accident.
-Mark
|
From a long time ago...
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=2364&v...f
In principle;
SD&P
Social, Domestic and pleasure. It does not, by default, cover to and from work. It is normally specifically amended to \"including to and from one permanent place of work\".
Class 1 (various actual other names. e.g.) Class A
For the business use of the policy holder. Subject to classes below, it is full business use. To and from various, carrying work people, other companies\' offices, etc. etc.
Class 2
Normally Class 1 but includes the same for the spouse.
Class 3
Includes the work of a salesman. Essentially the two main differences are carrying goods and samples and travelling to other offices/companies without an appointment. Commercial travelling etc.
Hire and Reward (taxis and the like) racing, etc. etc all excluded from all of the above.
Insurers have a variety of variations and combinations of the above, but it all follows the general principles above.
If in doubt, explain in writing the use the vehicle is being put to and ask for confirmation in writing from your insurer, not your broker, that it is covered.
I have said before, the checkout girl at Tescos doesn\'t know much about the laws concerning the ingredients of baked beans. Don\'t expect the call centre person you speak to on the phone to know any more than that about motor insurance.
You need to get to the underwriter.
If they wish to be pedantic, they can bounce a claim on an SD&P policy where you\'ve had an accident on your way to an office that is not your normal office - and that can leave you right up a gum tree without a paddle.
On matters of cover, ALWAYS get it in writing. They think about it more when they write it down because they realise it won\'t be deniable as to what was said or, more importantly, by whom.
|
As usual Mark(RLBS) gives good sound insurance advice, take note and get your friend to check with her broker/underwriter and get the result in writing.
This particular aspect of insurance can be a mine field. My wife occasionally has to attend courses in one of her company's other buildings in the same area as her normal place of work, after checking, her policy is OK as her insurance company view that as not really travelling on business but just attending another nearby site instead of her normal workplace and are happy to write that small difference in risk on the normal policy.
On the other hand one of her colleagues was told by her insurer that she needed to upgrade as their wording was 'permanent place of work' and 'permanent means precisely that, madam, permanent, not temporary; otherwise you could temporarily work anywhere in the country.'
It would be interesting to see if her employer would put its view in writing, after all if they don't inspect her policy and get the point verified they could in effect cause her to commit an offence. What she has to bear in mind is not even the risk of having an accident, if she were to be stopped by the police and asked the purpose of her journey and then asked to produce her documents she could be in the position of having invalid insurance for the purpose of that journey and therefore have committed the offence of driving whilst uninsured.
I think you would agree, much better to be certain and the cost difference is not normally that great.
Cockle
|
|
|
|
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/59ea7aca27121b78c454213772e4bd33/2e3f883550494c26d7e61fa88aa84a8d.jpg)
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/e3dddc56983548d7df69e9316eef9e93/a01549fd39a9dca7181c5032019f67d1.jpg)
