Help car insurance legal

Edwardgee

Does anyone know the legal position on the following: buying new car in a company name, have got insurance to cover me as an individual policy holder..the garage won't release the car as they say the registration doc needs to have the same name as the insurance doc..

Ie registered log book - company name
Insurance doc needs to be in company name to drive new car away.

I am insured on new car in my name..this seems mad to me and insurance companies don't understand either...help anyone..:mad::mad::mad:

mikey72

If you are a sole trader, it can be dubious at best. If you are a limited company, the insurance normally has to be in the company name, and your insurance is not valid if you have not disclosed you aren't the owner of the car.

InsideInsurance

If you are a sole trader I am not certain you would be allowed to register the vehicle in your trading name given that it is just a trading name and that you are the legal entity.

There is nothing wrong with a limited company owning a vehicle and a private individual insuring it as long as you have correctly advised the insurer that this is the case.

If you are talking a limited company and you have some form of finance on the vehicle then there could be a potential issue in doing what you say you've done. The contract for the finance is between the company and the finance company and that agreement most likely states that the company must insure the vehicle. As the company hasn't insured the vehicle, you have, it has failed to meet the requirements of the finance agreement.

kingstreet

What happens if the RK is a finance company and the keeper is an employee of a business which leases the vehicle?

The V5C has the finance company's name but the insurance cover is in the name of the keeper's firm?

vax2002

It is non of the garages business who your contract of insurance is with and they have no legal right to inspect your private documents.
Tell them to take a hike and buy the car elsewhere.

InsideInsurance

There is no general legal issues with the Registered Keeper and the insured being different names, as long as the insurer knows this.

There can be contractual issues as per my previous post where deals are done between two parties (the finance company and the company obtaining the vehicle) and all of a sudden a third party comes on to the scene saying they're fulfilling the obligations of one of the other two parties.

InsideInsurance

vax2002 wrote: »

they have no legal right to inspect your private documents.

They have every right to in appropriate circumstances.

An obvious example is if the car is on HP or an operating lease in which case it remains the property of the finance company for which the garage is an agent. They are entitled to ensure the entity they are giving the vehicle to is fulfilling its obligations under the contract one of which will be to have comprehensive insurance on it.

kingstreet

I can see why this is being asked. There's no insurable interest as things stand. However it seems to work at a higher corporate level as I presume the agreement between the finance company and the employer constitutes an insurable interest.

Thanks, InsIns. I was mulling that over as I was typing.

It would help if the OP told us if he's a sole trader, partnership or limited company and if the vehicle is financed.

mikey72

If the op has a personal policy it needs to be on his car.
If the ltd company own the car, it's needs to be on insurance taken out by the ltd company, and the op needs to be included on the employees that can drive it. Usually the problem is the ltd compny has no ncd, and the customer incorrectly uses his own gained from his private car, and gets a much cheaper premium.

There have been a couple of threads on here where insurers have voided policies taken out incorrectly.
The garage are correct in checking there is valid insurance before they hand the keys over, rather than just let potentially uninsured drivers take the car and leave.
It sounds like thet are on the ball here.

mikey72

kingstreet wrote: »

I can see why this is being asked. There's no insurable interest as things stand. However it seems to work at a higher corporate level as I presume the agreement between the finance company and the employer constitutes an insurable interest.

Thanks, InsIns. I was mulling that over as I was typing.

It would help if the OP told us if he's a sole trader, partnership or limited company and if the vehicle is financed.

What sort of example are you thinking of where the company own the car, but the employee insures it?

System

A Limited Company can buy a car for the use of one of it's employees.

The car can be registered in the company name or in the name of the employee.

The insurance policy can be in the company name with the employee named as the main driver or an individual policy in the name of the employee can be taken out stating that the car is owned by the company.

If the car is being purchased using a finance agreement, then the terms of that agreement need to be adhered to, but if the finance agreement does not insist on the registered keeper being the same name as the insurance policy holder, then the car dealer is wrong, the insurance policy does not need to be in the same name as the V5C