How can you drive home when buying a car from private seller?

Johnmcl7

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

Well you can doubt what you like! I am hardly going to start proving anything to you

I really don't see what people are getting so hung up about.
If you're going to buy a car privately then you'll want to test drive it. When you put the money in their hand to take it out for a spin ( as a security that you won't just drive away with it! ) ... what's the difference? You'd be driving under the DOC cover, and you can still run over kittens and children.

Also ... if you're "not insured", and you "don't crash" - is there a problem?

People are getting hung up about it because not only is your advice wrong but the consequences are pretty severe - in the immediate short term the vehicle will likely be seized which is at least a couple of hundred to get released and the FPN for no insurance is another couple of hundred. But the long term issues are worse, insurance companies do not like IN10 offences so for five years you're looking at a big increase in insurance premiums and if you're on six or more points at the time then you're facing 12 points and an automatic ban of six months or more unless you can plead exceptional hardship.

After you hand over the money to pay for a car, it is no longer a test drive no matter what you claim and you now own it hence DOV cover is no longer valid. That sort of semantics does not wash with the police or magistrates and you'll find cases in the Pepipoo forum where people have tried something similar to what you've recommended and ended up with six points on their license and that insurance unfriendly IN10 code.

That's why people are getting 'hung up' about your bad advice because not only is it wrong but you don't seem to appreciate the fairly severe implications of it. As for 'Also ... if you're "not insured", and you "don't crash" - is there a problem?' in short yes there is as it's offence to drive without insurance regardless of whether you crash or not, if the car doesn't have any policy it will get flagged up by ANPR. The cost of day insurance is usually not expensive or you can get an existing policy changed and effective straight away, even if you need to pay for short term car insurance it's well worth it when compared against the penalty for being caught with no insurance even if the risk doesn't appear that high.

John

CKhalvashi

wba31 wrote: »

I still have it on my NFU insurance policy, but i know my father's policy with Axa (I think) has it removed.

It will vary by insurer.

There are a number of clauses on our fleet policy, that it covers certain vehicles for any driver over 21, provided they fit into a certain category. I don't, as I have over 6 points, although it does interestingly cover a number of EU drivers, whos speeding fines are :eek:

CK

UsernameAlreadyExists

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

<Stuff>.
John

In my case ... THE. CAR. WAS. INSURED. OK?
Can I make that any clearer? It won't flag up on ANPR, It won't get siezed ... the only way anything would happen is if I was driving like a !!!!, drew attention to myself, or got involved in an accident. And if I had ... I hadn't bought it at that point.

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

After you hand over the money to pay for a car, it is no longer a test drive no matter what you claim and you now own it hence DOV cover is no longer valid.

That's B0llocks. I've handed over money to private sellers in order to test drive performance cars and bikes (in case I did a runner, or crashed them) and have ended up not buying them for various reasons (and obviously got my money back). I didn't own them. I've even sold vehicles and demanded the money myself before I've let them take them out. They didn't own them either.

thenudeone

Chopper_Read wrote: »

Just drive it on your full comp.

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

1) Don't assume that because you have comprehensive cover, you are automatically covered third party to drive other vehicles. Not all insurers offer this. You need to check your certificate.

2) Even if you have third party cover to drive other vehicles, some insurers make it a condition that the vehicle itself must have some other cover on it (otherwise the keeper is breaking the law)

3) even if 1) and 2) are okay, every DOC cover I've ever had has always excluded any vehicle owned (and often leased or hired as well) by the policyholder, precisely to stop people buying one policy and driving other vehicles they own without another policy.

For example, my LV certificate states:

The Policyholder may also drive with the owner's permission a private motor car not owned by the Policyholder and not hired to the Policyholder under a hire purchase agreement.

So you almost certainly can't drive away a car you've just bought, without arranging separate cover.

The easiest solution is to bring a spouse, partner, or friend who has DOC cover (which doesn't require the car to have a policy), and get them to drive it home.

Chopper_Read

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

In my case ... THE. CAR. WAS. INSURED. OK?
Can I make that any clearer? It won't flag up on ANPR, It won't get siezed ... the only way anything would happen is if I was driving like a !!!!, drew attention to myself, or got involved in an accident. And if I had ... I hadn't bought it at that point.


That's B0llocks. I've handed over money to private sellers in order to test drive performance cars and bikes (in case I did a runner, or crashed them) and have ended up not buying them for various reasons (and obviously got my money back). I didn't own them. I've even sold vehicles and demanded the money myself before I've let them take them out. They didn't own them either.

Yes you had bought it and you were trying to play the system. You weren't covered end of.

Chopper_Read

thenudeone wrote: »

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

1) Don't assume that because you have comprehensive cover, you are automatically covered third party to drive other vehicles. Not all insurers offer this. You need to check your certificate.

2) Even if you have third party cover to drive other vehicles, some insurers make it a condition that the vehicle itself must have some other cover on it (otherwise the keeper is breaking the law)

3) even if 1) and 2) are okay, every DOC cover I've ever had has always excluded any vehicle owned (and often leased or hired as well) by the policyholder, precisely to stop people buying one policy and driving other vehicles they own without another policy.

For example, my LV certificate states:

The Policyholder may also drive with the owner's permission a private motor car not owned by the Policyholder and not hired to the Policyholder under a hire purchase agreement.

So you almost certainly can't drive away a car you've just bought, without arranging separate cover.
a
The easiest solution is to bring a spouse, partner, or friend who has DOC cover (which doesn't require the car to have a policy), and get them to drive it home.

I see you've been reading this thread and haven't jumped in with both feet.

Aretnap

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

In my case ... THE. CAR. WAS. INSURED. OK?
Can I make that any clearer? It won't flag up on ANPR, It won't get siezed ... the only way anything would happen is if I was driving like a !!!!, drew attention to myself, or got involved in an accident. And if I had ... I hadn't bought it at that point.

Putting it in apital letters and bold type doesn't make it any more true. When the sale took place and whether you were the owner at the time would be a question of fact which would ultimately be for the court to decide, not for you to decide. If you'd handed over the money and driven off with no intention of returning it, it would be open to them to decide that you had become the owner, in spite of your protestations that you and the seller had uttered some magic words which stopped you becoming the owner. So the insurers would likely be entitled to refuse you cover in the circumstances, and the magistrates would be entitled to oonvict you of driving without insurance.

Chopper_Read

Aretnap wrote: »

Putting it in apital letters and bold type doesn't make it any more true. When the sale took place and whether you were the owner at the time would be a question of fact which would ultimately be for the court to decide, not for you to decide. If you'd handed over the money and driven off with no intention of returning it, it would be open to them to decide that you had become the owner, in spite of your protestations that you and the seller had uttered some magic words which stopped you becoming the owner. So the insurers would likely be entitled to refuse you cover in the circumstances, and the magistrates would be entitled to oonvict you of driving without insurance.

In those circumstances, had there been an accident there was insurance on the vehicle. The previous keepers who would have to cover third party losses. But do you think the seller would stand by his story?

Bear in mind he is allegedly a police officer.

dacouch

Chopper_Read wrote: »

In those circumstances, had there been an accident there was insurance on the vehicle. The previous keepers who would have to cover third party losses. But do you think the seller would stand by his story?

Bear in mind he is allegedly a police officer.

Judging by my earlier links he would although when he realises that his Insurer who will be obliged to pay it under the RTA would once they've paid the claim come after the seller to reimberse them he will almost certainly change his mind.

Perhaps in the above circumstances this could be the Holy Grail one poster is looking for with regards to a seller aiding and abetting no insurance although being in the job it would be highly unlikely even if it was feasible to secure a conviction

Chopper_Read

dacouch wrote: »

Judging by my earlier links he would although when he realises that his Insurer who will be obliged to pay it under the RTA would once they've paid the claim come after the seller to reimberse them he will almost certainly change his mind.

Perhaps in the above circumstances this could be the Holy Grail one poster is looking for with regards to a seller aiding and abetting no insurance although being in the job it would be highly unlikely even if it was feasible to secure a conviction

It wouldn't be aid and abet it would be a simple no insurance for the buyer.