URGENT. Does anyone know any insurance company that insures impounded cars?

pogofish

There was a similar thread a just a few weeks back and its OP did find someone who would insure an impounded car at a not unreasonable premium loading, maybe searching that out will help.

ado

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Well as long as the car IS insured, the police shouldn't care that the owner declared that its to get the car out of the pound should they? - The legal requirement is to have a minimum of 3rd party insurance. There is no law that says you must have specific "Get car out of the pound" insurance. IMO the police are going above and beyond the call of duty.

Many insurance companies now state that they will not insure a vehicle if it has been impounded by the police, as such the police will need proof that any new insurance bought will cover the driver when they go to collect it. The police therefore are not going above and beyond the call of duty by insisting on the correct insurance before releasing the car.

sarahg1969

I've seen restrictions on motor trade certificates, but do they now actually ask if the vehicle is currently impounded? It's not something I've ever been asked when shopping around for quotes.

TrickyWicky

ado wrote: »

Many insurance companies now state that they will not insure a vehicle if it has been impounded by the police, as such the police will need proof that any new insurance bought will cover the driver when they go to collect it.

I don't know about the many but my insurers state similar that the other vehicles / 3rd party cover can't be used to secure the release of an impounded vehicle. There is nothing that says they will not directly insure a vehicle that is impounded.

ado

sarahg1969 wrote: »

I've seen restrictions on motor trade certificates, but do they now actually ask if the vehicle is currently impounded? It's not something I've ever been asked when shopping around for quotes.

The insurance company won't ask however the police will want to see that there isn't a clause in the small print prohibiting the user from using it to remove a car from a police compound.

pogofish

Here is the thread - Once you sift through the argument, there may be useful info in there:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4228461

ado

TrickyWicky wrote: »

I don't know about the many but my insurers state similar that the other vehicles / 3rd party cover can't be used to secure the release of an impounded vehicle. There is nothing that says they will not directly insure a vehicle that is impounded.

I think I might have misconstrued your original point however the if the insurance doesn't permit use to remove a car from a police pound then the op or anyone acting on her behalf, won't be able to use it to get the car out.

thenudeone

I think people are jumping to conclusions.

When the OP said:

SuperMuna wrote: »

On 23rd Dec, my nephew drove the car and it was impounded by the police.

.. the nephew could have been driving perfectly legitimately.

For example, my certificate covers me to drive any other car with the owners' permission. Some policies make it a condition of such cover that the car has its own policy, but mine doesn't, so I would be covered to drive my uncle's car.

So we need to find out whether the nephew was insured. If he was, then the OP + his nephew simply need to take the relevant certificate within 7 days to the police station nominated by his nephew at the time of the stop. The police should be able to confirm that there will be no prosecution of either party because no offence has taken place.

Then, there is no need to tell the insurer anything because no prosecution is pending. The OP can simply buy a policy as normal (after checking all the insurers' questions carefully) and use the new certificate to release the car.

It's possible that the police may allow the release once it's been proved that the driver was actually correctly insured. It's also possible that they may refund the storage fees (some people have reported so on these forums). But - as long as the seizure was legal, they will probably insist on seeing a certificate providing cover to release the vehicle, which will probably mean a policy specific to the vehicle, since DOC cover and trade policies usually exclude cover for seized vehicles.

I'm not sure why you says this:

SuperMuna wrote: »

when I tell insurance providers about the car being impounded by the police, they all refuse to insure it.

I've just been through the Aviva website to get a quote using dummy details and as far as I can tell it doesn't ask you to declare whether or not the car is currently in storage following seizure.
If insurers never covered seized cars no-one would ever get their previously uninsured car out of seizure, which clearly they can.

SuperMuna wrote: »

I've been advised by the police that I must inform the insurance company about the 'situation' before I carry out the policy,
...
Also the police said, that whenever I come to collect the car, they will call up the insurance and inquire if I informed them about the car being impounded

It is debatable whether the police are authorised to provide information like this to insurers. Having a vehicle seized is not an offence and, as explained above, someone could have their vehicle seized yet be perfectly innocent of any offence. The police are subject to the Data Protection Act and can only hold, process, and pass on personal information for a lawful purpose. Whilst it could be argued that passing information to insurers about past or pending CONVICTIONS for motoring offences might be lawful (because if you haven't declared it you may be committing an offence), passing information about a vehicle seizure would, IMO, not be for a lawful purpose and is therefore illegal.

What is clear is that the polcie have NO CHOICE but to release your vehicle once you provide proof of insurance covering your use of the vehicle as explained here
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/1606/regulation/5/made
note the word : "shall" which means that the law tells them that them will release the vehicle once the conditions are met.
They have no legal right to place extra conditions or make arbitrary decisions about which policy they will accept.

Sally_A

Police are very wary about certificates used to get a car from the compound, especially the cheaper end of the Motor Trade insurance market.

Short story - elderly man, through illness, no longer driving, did not renew his car insurance - car impounded. Sold the car (whilst in the compound) to one of my clients (Motor Trader). I did a specific cover note, and in the special conditions, specified the reg no of the impounded vehicle (with the OK from the insurance company).

Motor Trader went along with proof of purchase (from the elderly gent), and the specially worded cover note, and recovered said vehicle.

It was not a fiddle, it just stopped a perfectly good vehicle being crushed, and the old gent got a few quid from the sale.

The Police/compund can tell when there is a legitimate case, and when it's a try on.

No charge to the Motor Trader for the issue of the specified cover note either.

sarahg1969

TrickyWicky wrote: »

I don't know about the many but my insurers state similar that the other vehicles / 3rd party cover can't be used to secure the release of an impounded vehicle. There is nothing that says they will not directly insure a vehicle that is impounded.

I agree. It's usually the DOV that can't be used to retrieve vehicles. I've never heard of insurers refusing cover for an impounded vehicle under its own policy.