IS son covered (car insurance)

castle96

he has a car (owned by him) and insurance in his own name on that car. His car has been 'laid up' (not sorn), as it has no MOT or tax. He drives his mother's car and a works van.
He thinks that as he 'has insurance', he can do this. Surely his own insurance is invalidated as he has no mot/tax ?
thanks

Quentin

No, you don't need mot or tax to take out insurance on a vehicle.

The insurance he has for driving other cars is TPO (providing it is shown on his insurance certificate), so any damage done to the mother's car/works van isn't covered.

castle96

thanks, but if he WAS driving his OWN car (with current insurance, but no mot/tax), then his own insurance would not be valid/pay up (as he HAS ? to have mot/tax - that IS a requirement of insurance, isn't it). He knows/thinks that he would only have 3rd party on the other two vehicles. The works van is being used in connection with business, so a further problem ..?

Quentin

He would be breaking the law by driving with no tax/mot, but his insurance would still be valid. (The car just has to be roadworthy to comply with the insurance)

Regarding the business use, as long as his certificate shows he has business cover, then that would be OK. But why doesn't the employer have insurance on the van for employees to drive it?

negg

Every car needs and MOT and tax, so he can't drive his own car at all.

He will be covered third party only on other cars which have MOT and tax and his insurance will cover that. He also needs the owners permission (by law). If he is driving a car which is on hire purchase or is leased, the car/van is owned by the finance company and they have not given him permission and his insurance will not be valid.

So if the van at work is leased (as many are) - he is not insured. Unless the company insurance covers him fully comp.

Note that some insurance companies do not allow drivers to drive other cars third party, or you have to be over a certain age. Usually you also need fully comp to be covered as well - third party cover on his own car will probably only cover him for his own car. He really needs to check with the insurance companies terms and conditions in full.

FlameCloud

negg wrote: »

Every car needs and MOT and tax, so he can't drive his own car at all.

He will be covered third party only on other cars which have MOT and tax and his insurance will cover that. He also needs the owners permission (by law). If he is driving a car which is on hire purchase or is leased, the car/van is owned by the finance company and they have not given him permission and his insurance will not be valid.

With respect, this is inaccurate.

Insurers these days are being really tight on offering out TP cover to people, let alone to high risk groups. Simply assuming you are covered to drive other cars is exceptionally stupid without checking first.

negg

Sorry, you are right, should say "He MIGHT be covered third party..."

Quentin

As already posted, if covered TPO for driving other cars is included, this is shown on the insurance certificate - along with the conditions when it applies (owner's permission, etc)

molerat

Also his own car needs a SORN declaration made before he gets a nice letter from DVLA. If he has an accident in either of these vehicles the insurance company may try to recover any losses from him as he seems to be using them as his main transport.

dacouch

If your son has cover with Quinn then they do insist his car has an mot for it to be covered by them (If a mot is required for the vehicle and their may be some exceptions). In addition their policy states "you still have your vehicle and it has not been damaged beyond cost-effective repair" for the driving other cars to be valid.

If your son is under 25 and he thinks he has driving other cars cover its likely he is with Quinn so make sure you abide by their requirements as they are sticklers for sticking to their policy wording