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

Johnmcl7

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.

No, what you're typing is absolute nonsense and more importantly none of it is supported in law so whatever mistaken beliefs you hold are completely irrelevant. If you go to a car, take it a for a test drive decide to buy it by paying for it and driving it home that trip is not a test drive and doesn't matter what you call it anyway as you know own the car (in the eyes of the law) and DOV cover no longer applies. You may think it entertaining to argue semantics and give people information which can have severe financial implications and worse but it's not a view the police or magistrates agree with and as they're the ones that convict people on no insurance claims, they're the ones that matter, not you.

People have tried to play the semantics game as you have and found themselves with six points and an IN10 conviction, just because you claim to have bought from a police officer who said it was ok is meaningless, if you had been caught, convicted, appealed taken it to the crown court, won the appeal and had a precedent set that buying a car didn't mean you have actually bought the car (strange I know, but you seem to think this makes sense) then it would be relevant but none of that happened.

John

ice_babe

When we have brought my husbands car we paid a deposit and then collected the car a few days later. This gave us a chance to sort out the insurance and get the money together ect.

With mine we drove 120 miles so added the car into my policy before we even viewed it. Think it was around £20 and they still covered my old car for 7 days

Tilt

Another thread turning into an "i'm right, your wrong" argument which serves no purpose to the OP.

It's all quite simple really. The test drive argument; hand over cash to seller as security while buyer goes off on test drive. FAIL!! Once money has changed hands, the buyer's DOC cover (if he has it in the first place) becomes invalid as he is now the owner. Court would argue; "you could of taken seller with you on test drive so no need to hand over cash at that point thus meaning your DOC would apply, although the seller may be guilty of an offence if the car has no third party cover in it's own right".

SOLUTION; Buyer obtains a 24 hour temp insurance cover in his own right applicable to the car in question and carries certificate or cover note with him (electronic transmitted certificates acceptable).

Job done.

Chopper_Read

Tilt wrote: »

Another thread turning into an "i'm right, your wrong" argument which serves no purpose to the OP.

It's all quite simple really. The test drive argument; hand over cash to seller as security while buyer goes off on test drive. FAIL!! Once money has changed hands, the buyer's DOC cover (if he has it in the first place) becomes invalid as he is now the owner. Court would argue; "you could of taken seller with you on test drive so no need to hand over cash at that point thus meaning your DOC would apply, although the seller may be guilty of an offence if the car has no third party cover in it's own right".

SOLUTION; Buyer obtains a 24 hour temp insurance cover in his own right applicable to the car in question and carries certificate or cover note with him (electronic transmitted certificates acceptable).

Job done.

Where as you're always right?

Tilt

Chopper_Read wrote: »

Where as you're always right?

Nobody is 'always right'. But do you disagree with the above then?

JimmyTheWig

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

I hadn't bought it at that point.

I'd be happy to be convinced that if you were around the corner having left cash with the owner as security and there was a valid reason for the owner not going with you on the test drive (e.g. baby asleep upstairs) then you hadn't bought the car and were going on a test drive.
But if you were 100 miles away? And 100 miles away in the direction of your own house? I can't imagine any court in the land believing that that was a test drive. You _had_ bought it at that point.

Chopper_Read

Tilt wrote: »

Nobody is 'always right'. But do you disagree with the above then?

It's your attitude I disagree with.

Tilt

Chopper_Read wrote: »

It's your attitude I disagree with.

MY attitude?? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Chopper_Read

Tilt wrote: »

MY attitude?? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Yeah you just had to add to it didn't you?

Tilt wrote: »

Another thread turning into an "i'm right, your wrong" argument which serves no purpose to the OP.

It's all quite simple really. The test drive argument; hand over cash to seller as security while buyer goes off on test drive. FAIL!! Once money has changed hands, the buyer's DOC cover (if he has it in the first place) becomes invalid as he is now the owner. Court would argue; "you could of taken seller with you on test drive so no need to hand over cash at that point thus meaning your DOC would apply, although the seller may be guilty of an offence if the car has no third party cover in it's own right".

SOLUTION; Buyer obtains a 24 hour temp insurance cover in his own right applicable to the car in question and carries certificate or cover note with him (electronic transmitted certificates acceptable).

Job done.

dacouch

Tilt wrote: »

Another thread turning into an "i'm right, your wrong" argument which serves no purpose to the OP. lol

It's all quite simple really. The test drive argument; hand over cash to seller as security while buyer goes off on test drive. FAIL!! Once money has changed hands, the buyer's DOC cover (if he has it in the first place) becomes invalid as he is now the owner. Court would argue; "you could of taken seller with you on test drive so no need to hand over cash at that point thus meaning your DOC would apply, although the seller may be guilty of an offence if the car has no third party cover in it's own right".

SOLUTION; Buyer obtains a 24 hour temp insurance cover in his own right applicable to the car in question and carries certificate or cover note with him (electronic transmitted certificates acceptable).

Job done.

The DOC extension would and should cover you for a genuine test drive as the car is not your property. The example you've given is a genuine test drive and whether the owner was with you or not would not make any difference. Should an Insurer argue the case, they would be overturned.

A court would not argue the matter as it's a test drive with no obligation to buy unless you write the car off.

The DOC extension on a certificate or a policy wording makes no mention about test drives needing to be covered. They make the distinction of the car not belonging to you or being hired to you.

Dealing with claims where customers have had an accident on a test drive are not that unusual, I've seen plenty (accompanied and unaccompanied) paid without arguement.

Once the money's changed hands and a deal is done then the vehicle belongs to the policyholder and the DOC no longer applies.

Insurers and the police do look into these when there's a claim or the police stop them as the owner needs to have his own cover on it not DOC as plenty of people do take a chance on their DOC / do not understand it does not cover them. Funnily enough the original owner is never keen to want to claim on their insurance long with the associated porkies when an uninsured buyer crashes the car.