Am I insured??

molerat

For all those doubting the requirement for the "other car" to be insured please check all your documents carefully. My 2011 and current cert, 2011 and current key facts and 2011 policy glibly states DOC. The only place that the insurance requirement is to be found is buried in the new policy document. Do not rely on a quick skim of your certificate of insurance or what you had last year.

vaio

dacouch wrote: »

Driving your own car or someone else's car is not much difference in this context as both are covered come under your own Insurance and are governed by the FSA's ICOBS rules and the Ombudsman's rules.

Here's a recent case on MSE (There are plenty more), whilst the Insurer in question (Admiral) do not have a requirement for an MOT. The thread contains links and explanations as to why an MOT requirement is unenforceable. The same principles will apply to Road Tax (The AA should know better about Road Tax).

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4374613

I'm struggling here on DOC cover.......why is an mot & road tax requirement unenforceable but a requirement for the other car to be insured is enforceable?

dacouch

vaio wrote: »

I'm struggling here on DOC cover.......why is an mot & road tax requirement unenforceable but a requirement for the other car to be insured is enforceable?

Due to the Ombudsman's statement plus the FSA ICOBS.

I know what you mean about the requirement for the other car being covered being at odds with the FSA ICOBS in that the chances of the other car not being insured would not be related to an accident being quite remote.

It would be something to be tested by complaint to the Ombudsman.

thenudeone

steve-L wrote: »

You can't (without trade insurance) drive another car that is not insured by someone else on your fully comp.

Well, mine does.

The policy booklet is here http://www.lv.com/upload/lv-rebrand-2009/pdfs/insurance/car/21121973_lv-motor-doi.pdf

The conditions for DOC are listed on pages 11 & 12, and they DO NOT include a requirement that the vehicle has its own insurance. I'm fed up with the number of times people post here saying that DOC requires it. It may do with some insurers, but it may not.

However, in the OP's circumstance, DOC cover will not apply, because he/she is the owner of the car, and that exclusion is pretty universal, in my experience.

UsernameAlreadyExists

Interesting thread. I too was convinced that "DOC" required the other car to insured in it's own right but that's just years of misconception and never bothering to read the documents

As an aside, the last car I bought (a 2nd car) I negotiated with seller that I didn't actually own the car until I got home. He'd not cancelled his insurance on it, so it meant I could drive it home and then leisurely search for a decent quote. Had I been stopped, I was merely on an extended test drive.

paddedjohn

To drive using your doc cover doesn't need the other car to be insured but, an uninsured car needs to be SORN and to do that you need to return the tax disc for a refund so therefore in the majority of times you may be insured but you won't be taxed and you will be driving a SORN car on the road.

UsernameAlreadyExists

Indeed, and that's what rdwarr said back in post #22

System

thenudeone wrote: »

Well, mine does.

The policy booklet is here http://www.lv.com/upload/lv-rebrand-2009/pdfs/insurance/car/21121973_lv-motor-doi.pdf

The conditions for DOC are listed on pages 11 & 12, and they DO NOT include a requirement that the vehicle has its own insurance. I'm fed up with the number of times people post here saying that DOC requires it. It may do with some insurers, but it may not.

However, in the OP's circumstance, DOC cover will not apply, because he/she is the owner of the car, and that exclusion is pretty universal, in my experience.

Just to confirm that LV do not require any further insurance on the vehicle I emailed them to ask. The response was as follows

Dear Mr xxxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting us online about your car insurance policy number - xxxxxxxxxxxxx

I can confirm that you are covered to drive any other vehicle on a third party basis, as long as you have the owners permission. The vehicle does not need to be insured elsewhere.

Thank you for your feedback. I I have now logged your comments and a manager will look into this for you.

I hope this is of assistance.

EdGasket

!!!!!! wrote: »

Just to confirm that LV do not require any further insurance on the vehicle I emailed them to ask. The response was as follows

Yes but the 'other car' must either be sorned or insured anyway; and if it is SORNED, it cannot be used on the road until the SORN is removed which requires tax which in turn requires insurance. So implicitly the other car must be insured to be legal.

paddedjohn

EdGasket wrote: »

Yes but the 'other car' must either be sorned or insured anyway; and if it is SORNED, it cannot be used on the road until the SORN is removed which requires tax which in turn requires insurance. So implicitly the other car must be insured to be legal.

But it would still be insured, the offence would be no tax (unless driving to a pre booked mot) and possibly driving a SORN declared vehicle on the road (unless driving to a pre booked mot)