Pulled on way home with new car.

Wig

Bikertov wrote: »

Tell me I am wrong anyone ?

You're wrong.

Wig

Sorry, couldn't resist.

You will find that DOC cover on most insurance policies does not require the other car to be insured on 9 out of 10 policies.

Check your own and let us know what it says.

Wig

bristol_pilot wrote: »

If the individual kept his trap shut, is there any evidence at all that the driver was not stopped whilst on a test drive? He then bought the car later the same day (didn't he).

Or they had an agreement to transfer ownership at 10pm that evening, (didn't they)

Happychappy

The car would have had a marker against the number on PNC, as no insurance held, hence the reason for the stop, maybe the "friend" omitted to say that ?

Bikertov

Wig wrote: »

Sorry, couldn't resist.

You will find that DOC cover on most insurance policies does not require the other car to be insured on 9 out of 10 policies.

Check your own and let us know what it says.

But surely that would allow ANYONE to get their 'friend' to by a Ferarri, their 'friend' not insure it, and then drive it around via the DOC clause on a cheap TPO policy on their 20-year-old-Mini insurance for a pittance

Maybe you should check YOUR policy wording

Wig

Happychappy wrote: »

The car would have had a marker against the number on PNC, as no insurance held, hence the reason for the stop, maybe the "friend" omitted to say that ?

There was insurance on the vehicle the seller made that clear at the point of sale. They were stopped because they were away from the home address of the vehicle.

mikey72

Bikertov wrote: »

But surely that would allow ANYONE to get their 'friend' to by a Ferarri, their 'friend' not insure it, and then drive it around via the DOC clause on a cheap TPO policy on their 20-year-old-Mini insurance for a pittance

Maybe you should check YOUR policy wording

100% correct.
That's why a lot of policies won't give that clause to young drivers now, and why there are so many threads on here about the lack of the clause on new policies.

Wig

Bikertov wrote: »

But surely that would allow ANYONE to get their 'friend' to by a Ferarri, their 'friend' not insure it, and then drive it around via the DOC clause on a cheap TPO policy on their 20-year-old-Mini insurance for a pittance

Maybe you should check YOUR policy wording

I already know my policy wording and that of the last 8 (different) insurers I have had.
I seriously suggest YOU check YOUR policy on this.

In response to the Ferrari issue, you would only be insured TPO so any bump would be expensive to repair. You would also fall foul of the rules on "fronting" and if discovered could lose your cover completely. Your 'friend' might also decide to sell 'his' Ferrari where would you be then?

Wig

mikey72 wrote: »

100% correct.

100% incorrect IMHO

That's why a lot of policies won't give that clause to young drivers now

I have never read a "young driver" policy, can you link to some?

and why there are so many threads on here about the lack of the clause on new policies.

Can you link to some of them? I haven't seen them.

mikey72

Wig wrote: »

I already know my policy wording and that of the last 8 (different) insurers I have had.
I seriously suggest YOU check YOUR policy on this.

In response to the Ferrari issue, you would only be insured TPO so any bump would be expensive to repair. You would also fall foul of the rules on "fronting" and if discovered could lose your cover completely. Your 'friend' might also decide to sell 'his' Ferrari where would you be then?

How's it fronting?
You're driving legally, on your own insurance.
Fronting is driving as the main driver when you're on someone elses insurance as a second driver.