No Insurance?!

rev_henry

imfedup wrote: »

What a load of tosh - sorry, but it is. I was convicted for no insurance just under 4 years ago. My Insurance didnt go up and I was with one of the big Insurance companies, alright it didnt go down either but it certainly didnt cost me thousands, in fact I am currently insured fully comp with protected NCB for under £400 a year.

I am not saying that you should drive with no insurance, sometimes it happens as has happened with the OP and myself. In fact I would go so much as to say that if insurers did charge "thousands" for no insurance more people would think twice about getting into a car knowing that they were not insured. But it is clear here that the OP thought that her OH was insured under TP cover for her vehicle. AND it has probably made a lot of readers of this thread check their certificate or ring their insurance company for clarification.

Well, tbh, having no insurance won't increase the risk like, say a speeding or running a red light conviction will. Other offences would show someone to be a more dangerous driver and thus a greater risk. So that would explain why your insurance didn't go up.

Dave101t

bramble1 wrote: »

We've got the certificate it arrived today, i've not had a chance to look at it but OH can't see any mention of being allowed to drive other cars, we thought it did.

this is the most telling part of the whole thread.
people, check your documents!

bramble1

Dave101t wrote: »

this is the most telling part of the whole thread.
people, check your documents!

Totally agree, what a lesson has been learnt! I am mad at myself for not checking it properly in the first place, chances are we will have to learn the hard way and OH will get points and a fine, hopefully others will learn from my stupid mistake though!

Thanks for everyone's help on the matter.

Premier_2

mrmichaelf wrote: »

Having worked in insurance for several years, I'll just clarify, if it isn't stated on the certificate that you CAN drive other cars thrid party then you are NOT insured to do so.

Also, 9/10 companies will state you can only drive another vehicle on third party cover in an EMERGENCY SITUATION and not for day to day use, for this the person must be added to the insurance policy.

Well I don't work in insurance, and never have done.

However I've had numerous car insurance policies and I've never seen that clause.

Some permit driving other cars (not owned or hired... blah blah blah), some explicitly restrict that further by not being owned/hired by a spouse/other family member, and some exclude altogether/don't mention it, but I've never come across cover in an emergency situation only. Perhaps I've only ever had the 10% of companies you refer to, but I've been with many of the big boys and some I'd never heard of before.

How exactly is "emergency situation" defined by the 90% of companies that you say have this restriction?
Perhaps you could name say 2 large companies with such a clause?

Edit: Just seen you are with Direct Line, but not mentioned there

dacouch

To add to Premier's comments, if you produce your Certificate of Insurance (Which is the legal document confirming you are covered and is set out in a prescribed form). The police would generally accept this as confirmation of what you are and are not covered. It is relatively rare for them to ask to see your policy booklet to look at any other resrtictions your Insurers may have added to their own Driving Other Cars restrictions.

Unless there is a definition of what an Emergency is in the Policy Booklet which I very very much doubt an Insurance Company would try and do as it would be very difficult to define. Then it would be difficult to impose this and it is unlikely the word "Emergency" is included on the Certificate (For this reason). If it is not included in the certificate then the RTA part of the policy would have to pay out so the police would not normally pursue no Insurance

bramble1

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

atrixcock

The OP didn't permit. She used the vehicle without insurance as she was in it at the time.;)

You need to read up on your use, cause and permit legislation.

This whole part of the discussion has really confused me...can you dumb it down and explain??

bramble1

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

In simple terms.

Your vehicle was driven with you in it. You were using the vehicle say to get home. It was not insured at the time it was driven therefore you used it without insurance.

Agree...but, the police didn't ask any details about who the passengers were at all, so couldn't prove i had been in vehicle...

If they could, what does that mean for me?

bramble1

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

Well they could go and speak to the keeper, who may look very similar to you and recognise you from the stop.

Points and a fine same as OH, same a permitting he to drive.

I'm not the keeper... it's my car but it's not in my name.

Ah well. I did the crime, so will accept the points and fine if it comes to it.

bramble1

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

Well they could always check the insurance policy holder, but then they've already done that and gained that evidence.;)

Ahhh didn't think of that! But as I said fully prepared to accept any fine or points, it's my own fault for not reading my insurance docs properly!

bramble1

Officer_Dibble wrote: »

Out of interest why aren't you the registered keeper?

Car was my brothers, then was given to me as a present and haven't gotten around to changed the registered keeper as of yet.. At least i don't think we have, i could be totally wrong.