Insurance Required Even If Not Driving

darich

B00st wrote: »

Over the last 12-18 months a large number of insurance policies (not just my, obviously rubbish, one) have added the requirement that DOC is only valid if the car already has insurance in place, so the list of people who could drive your car would be small and getting smaller. Worryingly some of them don't list the requirement on the certificate but leave it buried in the small print, making it easy to drive someones car and not be aware that it isn't insured.

Not denying this is the case but in all my years of driving with DOC on my policy, not once has any policy said the car must have its own insurance in place.

My current insurance has DOC but is also missing this condition

Wig

B00st wrote: »

Over the last 12-18 months a large number of insurance policies (not just my, obviously rubbish, one) have added the requirement that DOC is only valid if the car already has insurance in place, so the list of people who could drive your car would be small and getting smaller. Worryingly some of them don't list the requirement on the certificate but leave it buried in the small print, making it easy to drive someones car and not be aware that it isn't insured.

If they have been changing it would be because of this impending new law. But curious to know which companies have been changing in the last 12 - 18 months? How do you know this?

Mine also still has no such clause.

Oh and they wouldn't be driving my car (by mistake) because I'd ask them to bring their certificate & policy, and I would phone the insurer to check they are insured.

Wig

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Right ... this year my renewal occurred whilst my car was sitting in an airport car park over a long weekend. The renewal had been too expensive and I decided to shop around on the internet while I was away. I let it expire by a couple of days before commencing the new one a day before I returned.

That was 20th February. May I expect a penalty notice from DVLA?

I am heartily sick of these new wheezes :mad:

No it hasn't all started yet, although it is now the law, they haven't announced a date from which this will be starting. I think they will make an announcement and a publish a start date soon.

You are now insured so you have nothing to worry about, they certainly weren't doing this in February.

Wig

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/Motorinsurance/DG_067639

For those interested, look under "Compliance and enforcement" The first link is a PDF file report of the numbskull who we have to thank for all this nonsense.

B00st

Wig wrote: »

If they have been changing it would be because of this impending new law. But curious to know which companies have been changing in the last 12 - 18 months? How do you know this?

Mine also still has no such clause.

Oh and they wouldn't be driving my car (by mistake) because I'd ask them to bring their certificate & policy, and I would phone the insurer to check they are insured.

Going by this thread on Overclockers it would appear that Admiral, Bell and Swift all require insurance on the other vehicle for DOC to be valid. My main policy is through Highway and underwritten by Lloyds.

And good luck with ringing the actual insurance company / underwriters on a Saturday afternoon or a Sunday, and not the call centre.

mikey72

Wig wrote: »

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/Motorinsurance/DG_067639

For those interested, look under "Compliance and enforcement" The first link is a PDF file report of the numbskull who we have to thank for all this nonsense.

"Uninsured drivers inflict a major financial burden on other motorists, estimated at around £380 million each year or around £30 of the cost of each insurance premium.."

That's an interesting figure.
Cash for crash claims are supposed to be £340 million from figures from the ifb.
There's about 33 million vehicles in the uk, so that adds about £10 to each vehicle.
How does the £380 million come out as three times as much, with roughly the same figures?

mikey72

Wig wrote: »

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/Motorinsurance/DG_067639

For those interested, look under "Compliance and enforcement" The first link is a PDF file report of the numbskull who we have to thank for all this nonsense.

He doesn't suggest that anywhere though.
In fact more the opposite if you read #16 below.

Recommendation 1: The current widespread practice of condoning any apparent grace period for renewal of lapsed motor insurance policies should be discontinued and insurance providers should enforce the insurance requirement on a continuous basis.

Recommendation 2: Insurance providers should be required to collect systematically and report information on claims which they settle directly relating to incidents involving uninsured drivers in order to improve information capture on the scale and costs of the problem.

Recommendation 3: The purpose of, and legal requirement for, third party insurance should feature much more prominently in the Highway Code and driving theory test than at present.

Recommendation 4: Government and the industry should co-operate to initiate a programme of awareness raising of the requirement for third party insurance, the risks of driving uninsured and the consequences of doing so.
This should coincide with the implementation of measures to increase detection.

Recommendation 5: Since young drivers are a particularly high-risk group, targeted initiatives could also be helpful. The school based programme currently sponsored by the Motor Accidents Solicitors’ Society is an example of good practice here.

Recommendation 6: The insurance industry should continue to develop products which price young drivers into the market earlier, provide incentives to them to gain driving experience and see the benefits of that experience in terms of the premiums they pay.
Recommendation 7: The insurance industry and Department for Transport should co-operate in building an easily navigable and searchable insurance portal on the DVLA and DSA web sites, which reminds clients of their legal responsibility for third party insurance, provides rapid access to information on insurance premia and links to on-line purchase facilities.

Recommendation 8: Appropriate changes in the Police Bill should be made, or the next available legislative opportunity taken, to provide Police Forces with full and unrestricted access to the Motor Insurance Database (MID).

Recommendation 9: MID should be fully integrated with the Police National Computer in the same way as DVLA’s vehicle register.

Recommendation 10: The roll-out of Automatic Number-Plate Recognition (ANPR) should be accelerated to ensure that more Police Forces have access to the technology to underpin enhanced detection and enforcement.

Recommendation 11: Fixed penalties paid by those caught driving without insurance should be retained to help fund accelerated roll-out of ANPR
Recommendation 12: Before being accredited to write motor insurance business, providers should be required not only to sign-up to their Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) levy but also to demonstrate to the appropriate regulatory authority that they have the capacity required to comply with rapid data entry to MID.

Recommendation 13: The permitted interval between an insurance policy being issued and details uploaded in the MID should be reduced from 14 days to 7 days by the end of 2006 with a target of 100% compliance.
Moreover, a target date by which real time data entry will be implemented should be set, at no later than the end of 2008.

Recommendation 14: More severe penalties should be implemented and applied for non-compliance with these targets.

Recommendation 15: To minimise the scope for fraudulent behaviour, arrangements for notification of cancellation of insurance should be altered to require insurers to notify MID and DVLA immediately of any policy cancellation, with appropriate penalties for non-compliance.

Recommendation 16: Insurance of the individual driver rather than insurance of the vehicle should continue to be the basis for third party liability cover in the UK.

Recommendation 17: Every motor insurance policy which is issued should contain information on both the insured driver(s) and the vehicle(s) they are insured to drive, in order to ensure that the relevant agencies can confidently use the MID to enforce insurance from the record.

Recommendation 18: Sentencing guidelines for Magistrates should be revised to require a minimum fine for uninsured driving which exceeds the fixed penalty.

Recommendation 19: A review should be undertaken of the non-fiscal penalties which could be made available to Magistrates in dealing with uninsured drivers.

Recommendation 20: Police Forces should be given the power to seize and, in appropriate circumstances, destroy vehicles that are being driven uninsured.

thenudeone

paddedjohn wrote: »

the dvla will only refund full months, if you return your tax early in the month you lose the remainder, then if you sell the car a week later the new owners would have to tax it again, thus the dvla are getting paid twice for the same month.

That has always been the case, and I agree it is unfair, although of limited importance if you were trying to sell the car privately because:
a) you would need tax to do any test drives on the road
b) you would probably sell the tax with the car; it would be factored in the price
Not sure it has anything to do with insurance though.

birkee

One observation I've not seen.
I'm insured full comp. Entitled to drive any car not owned by me with third party cover.
If I go to a private seller, roadtest the car, and decide to buy .... the car is then owned by me, and my insurance doesn't cover it, for me to drive it home.
What happens if I've bought the car for my Wife, who isn't insured yet, to drive the car home. I suppose the answer to that, is to say SHE bought it, and drive the car home myself.
This is all getting a bit messy folks, so expect lots of tweaking of the rules to occur.

mikey72

birkee wrote: »

One observation I've not seen.
I'm insured full comp. Entitled to drive any car not owned by me with third party cover.
If I go to a private seller, roadtest the car, and decide to buy .... the car is then owned by me, and my insurance doesn't cover it, for me to drive it home.
What happens if I've bought the car for my Wife, who isn't insured yet, to drive the car home. I suppose the answer to that, is to say SHE bought it, and drive the car home myself.
This is all getting a bit messy folks, so expect lots of tweaking of the rules to occur.

I've always done that, or she drives it back if it's bought in my name.