Dodgy Question about Car Insurance

mkoprulu

Hi all moneysavers,

My question is rather unusual. Here's the scenario:

Mr. X buys a car but doesn't insure it yet, he's not legally allowed to drive it.
Mr. Y has his own car, and is insured with it, and within his insurance terms, he is covered to drive someone else's car.
Mr. Y asks Mr. X to drive his new car, and takes it for a spin.

Police stops Mr. Y while driving Mr. X's car, and asks for documents.

Mr. Y produces:

-His own licence
-His own insurance documents that shows he's covered to drive someone else's car
-Car's own MOT and Tax
-Car's registration document with his friend Mr. X as the owner.

to the police.

Would it be enough? Or would the police ask for Mr. X's own insurance for the car as well? If not, is this a loophole in law?

Paul_Varjak

You should note that the registration document for a vehicle does not indicate vehicle ownership - it merely shows who is the keeper of the vehicle - who may, or may not be the owner.

eilz

So would Mr Y. get away with it or not?

ellou02

If you are covered to drive someone elses car by your own insurance, why would the car owner need insurance? They are not driving or using the car, and would not be responsible if it crashed, etc.

mkoprulu

Paul, i couldn't understand what you mean. When we are talking about registration document, we imply V5 vehicle registration document right? As far as i know, the owner of the vehicle is whoever is written on that. Keeper/owner, what's the difference?

By the way, i've just asked it to the facilities department of my company, and they queried this with our insurance company, who said it would be perfectly fine for someone to use some other person's car as long as they are insured themselves (Mr. Y gets away with it) but excluding business related use.

Therefore, i just drove my wife's car to work

eilz

That, dont make sense. Doesnt that mean I could have 5 cars:

1 in my dads name (no insurance)
1 in my mums name (no insurance)
1 in my brothers name (no insurance)
1 in MY NAME (insured, and allowed to drive other vehicles)

And I could drive all 4 with one policy on my OWN car and not get done for it, I DONT think I could, could I?

Greensprout

As far as I am aware your not insured on your insurance on someone else's car unless the car is insured..

If that was the case I'd buy a 10 year old 1 litre Fiesta insure it in my name.
Buy myself a Skyline, get my dad to put it in his name then drive that car on my Fiesta policy.. Saving me thousands on insurance.

So common sense tells me the car must be insured already.

biblejohn

Ive spoken to my insurance company about this before and they have said that im only covered on my own insurance to drive other vehicles if those other vehicles are not in my name and are insured by the owner of the vehicle.

To be honest, i think car insurance is quite a bit of a scam, they happily load the premiums for any small thing, but seldom knock anything off if you do anything which will reduce your premium. Not only that, i currently have 5 vehicles. I can only drive 1 at once, and happily want 3rd party only on them, so why do I have to have 5 seperate insurance policies? They will only have to ever pay out on the one im driving should I make a claim, so why cant they base a premium on the highest risk vehicle and let me drive any other vehicle in my name free of charge?

Another thing which anoyed me, is that ive 12 years ncb, am over 30 and have never made a single claim, dispite driving high performance cars and motorbikes all my life. How come, my 23 year old girlfriend who has only been driving for 4 years, has had 2 accidents/claims and only has 2 years ncb gets cheaper car insurance? Regardless of any general statistics which prove women might be safer drivers, surely taking into account my particular history compared to hers shows that im a much safer risk than she is?

Bossyboots

Insurance companies are closing the loophole that allows you to insure one vehicle and drive another. Many are now removing from their policies the cover for driving someone else's car at all. I have just checked my own policy and there is absolutely nothing that states the other car must be insured itself for me to drive it.

The risk you take in insuring only one car but driving another is that you are not covered for damage caused to the vehicle by that driver. Therefore, if you did as greensprout has mooted but then crashed the expensive car in an accident that was your fault, the damage is not covered.

Savvy_Sue

It does depend on your insurance company: some exclude this altogether and it's not generally recommended except in an emergency. Far better to phone the company and get cover extended to you for however long it's needed.

biblejohn wrote:

Not only that, i currently have 5 vehicles. I can only drive 1 at once, and happily want 3rd party only on them, so why do I have to have 5 seperate insurance policies? They will only have to ever pay out on the one im driving should I make a claim, so why cant they base a premium on the highest risk vehicle and let me drive any other vehicle in my name free of charge?

Well, the idea of covering multiple vehicles on one policy might be worth pursuing, but remember that you almost certainly have TP Fire and Theft on your vehicles. So while you're driving one, the other four could, theoretically, all go up in smoke or get nicked, so it's not the case that they will only ever have to pay out on one you're driving.

biblejohn wrote:

Another thing which anoyed me, is that ive 12 years ncb, am over 30 and have never made a single claim, dispite driving high performance cars and motorbikes all my life. How come, my 23 year old girlfriend who has only been driving for 4 years, has had 2 accidents/claims and only has 2 years ncb gets cheaper car insurance? Regardless of any general statistics which prove women might be safer drivers, surely taking into account my particular history compared to hers shows that im a much safer risk than she is?

Yes, but is she driving a car in a lower insurance group than you? We downsized last year from a car which we couldn't get insurance for our son to drive to a tiddly one, and our premiums halved!

impy78

mkoprulu wrote:

Hi all moneysavers,

My question is rather unusual. Here's the scenario:

Mr. X buys a car but doesn't insure it yet, he's not legally allowed to drive it.
Mr. Y has his own car, and is insured with it, and within his insurance terms, he is covered to drive someone else's car.
Mr. Y asks Mr. X to drive his new car, and takes it for a spin.

Police stops Mr. Y while driving Mr. X's car, and asks for documents.

Mr. Y produces:

-His own licence
-His own insurance documents that shows he's covered to drive someone else's car
-Car's own MOT and Tax
-Car's registration document with his friend Mr. X as the owner.

to the police.

Would it be enough? Or would the police ask for Mr. X's own insurance for the car as well? If not, is this a loophole in law?

No, it is not a loophole, because my Y as the driver has the minimum legal cover required to drive the vehicle in the UK.

There is no legal problem, Mr Y is quite within the law. mr Y only needs to produce his certificate of motor insurance really, but taking the registration document showing mr x would be a good idea, just to prove mr Y does not own the car.

As much as we insurance companies would like it to be otherwise, no the other car does not need to be insured, as legal only the driver has to be insured to drive it. (hence why some folk have trader's policies).