Driving on someone else's insurance

newfoundglory

Why do you need your own insurance to drive on someone else's insurance?

Rolandtheroadie

because you arnt driving on someone elses insurance.
They've insured their car for themselves.
They may have named other drivers and they will also be covered.
They may have insured the car for any driver over a certain age and if you are over this age you are covered.
Otherwise you need to be insured yourself.

focae

newfoundglory wrote: »

Why do you need your own insurance to drive on someone else's insurance?

Not sure that is true.

You need to be insured on your own car if your insurance covers you to drive someone elses' car (usually third party ownly). The car must be insured by the owner/keeper as well........your insurance will probably be invalid if there is no existing insurance on the car (stand to be corrected on this point).

If you are a named driver on someone elses' policy or they insure their car for any driver.....then you don't need your own insurance.

Kurtis_Blue

newfoundglory wrote: »

Why do you need your own insurance to drive on someone else's insurance?

Because its SOMEONE else's insurance.

Nilrem

Because insurance risks aren't just down to the vehicle being driven, but also much more the person who is driving.

Hence they insure the person for a specific vehicle, or combination of people and vehicles (depending on the policy/how much you're willing to spend for the cover).

When you drive someone elses car, you (unless you're on their insurance as a named driver, or they have an any driver policy) you're uninsured, unless your own policy covers you to drive other cars not owned by you (in which case you'll probably only be covered for third party damage..).

Re the other vehicle having to be insured for drive other cars part of your own policy being legal, that varies by policy so should always be checked (some policies will only cover your on other cars if the car has a full policy covering it as well, some don't have that condition).

dacouch

focae wrote: »

Not sure that is true.

You need to be insured on your own car if your insurance covers you to drive someone elses' car (usually third party ownly). The car must be insured by the owner/keeper as well........your insurance will probably be invalid if there is no existing insurance on the car (stand to be corrected on this point).

The vast majority of policies do not stipulate that the other car you are driving must have insurance.

Some policies stipulate that your own car must be roadworthy and / or not written off

dacouch

Newfoundglory, are you asking this question as you have just seen a police show on TV? I ask this as there was a cop show on recently where the policewoman did not understand insurance and told the driver she had stopped him in (It belonged to someone else) that if he was a named driver on the vehicle he as driving or was driving under any driver that he also had to have his own cover on his own vehicle. The advice she gave in relation to the person she stopped was incorrect and we had a discussion in the Insurance forum about it at the time

anewman

dacouch wrote: »

The vast majority of policies do not stipulate that the other car you are driving must have insurance.

Some policies stipulate that your own car must be roadworthy and / or not written off

Although the car itself must have insurance to be legally used on the highway.

dacouch wrote: »

there was a cop show on recently where the policewoman did not understand insurance and told the driver she had stopped him in (It belonged to someone else) that if he was a named driver on the vehicle he as driving or was driving under any driver that he also had to have his own cover on his own vehicle.

If this is the one I saw it was a white van, the driver called himself a gypsy and they were quick to cry discrimination, but it seemed to boil down to the fact that he had some sort of trader's policy, and was not a trader, so the insurance was null and void. Missed the topic on this though.

When you drive another car, it can only be done so if your policy allows you to, or you are a named driver on that vehicle's policy. You can't use the drive another car on your own policy on uninsured cars though because otherwise we'd all insure a 1l fiesta and drive around in 4 litre barges

dacouch

anewman wrote: »

Although the car itself must have insurance to be legally used on the highway.


If this is the one I saw it was a white van, the driver called himself a gypsy and they were quick to cry discrimination, but it seemed to boil down to the fact that he had some sort of trader's policy, and was not a trader, so the insurance was null and void. Missed the topic on this though.

When you drive another car, it can only be done so if your policy allows you to, or you are a named driver on that vehicle's policy. You can't use the drive another car on your own policy on uninsured cars though because otherwise we'd all insure a 1l fiesta and drive around in 4 litre barges

The vast vast majority of Insurers that allow you to drive other cars do not insist on the other vehicle being insured. I know of only about 5 Insurers who do stipulate the other vehicle must have it's own insurance.

If you have driving other cars without the stipulation on the other car having it's own insurance then you are covered legally to drive on the highway.

I was referring to the same program, funnily enough she was correct when she said the traders policy did not cover him as he was a trader which is quite a complex issue so it was surprising she knew this. However she was totally wrong initially when he said he was covered by the van owners policy under his any driver cover when she said this only operated if he also was covered to drive other cars on his own policies (This is ignoring the fact the driving other cars is just that it only covers CARS not vans although a few companies include motorbikes)

Here is our discussion and the relevant clip http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2278259

newfoundglory

dacouch wrote: »

Newfoundglory, are you asking this question as you have just seen a police show on TV? I ask this as there was a cop show on recently where the policewoman did not understand insurance and told the driver she had stopped him in (It belonged to someone else) that if he was a named driver on the vehicle he as driving or was driving under any driver that he also had to have his own cover on his own vehicle. The advice she gave in relation to the person she stopped was incorrect and we had a discussion in the Insurance forum about it at the time

Yes, i did!:D

However, it is not the first time I have seen the Police make this strange and unusual claim. Stupidly, i thought the police might have actually been right.

Someone in my office has a similar policy which allows them to authorise any driver with a valid license to drive their car.

Why are we employing police officers who do not know what they are doing?

It actually makes me really quite frightened that you can be stopped, arrested and have your car seized due to police ignorance and incompetence of the relevant laws.

dacouch

If you read the thread I linked to we guessed there would be people who were miss lead by what the wpc said. She said it with such authority that a lot of people would believe it.

On the whole most police are reasonable and will ring the insurer or broker but I have spoken to some where my client insisted on ringing me on their on phone and the policeman did not know what they were talking about. They would not accept the information I gave and would not accept the Insurers telephone number to ring and confirm it with them.