Problem Insuring and Taxing 2 cars

flashnazia

Quentin wrote: »

Continuous insurance does not affect doc cover at all.

Continuous insurance relates to the rk's responsibility.

A car being driven on doc cover has rta cover.

Your point about tax is also irrelevant and incorrect. No tax has no effect whatever on the insurance position.

Don't bother changing your user name. We will still have to correct all your efforts whatever the name.

Leaving out the issues people have with the other poster, the op will surely lose the tax she has on car 1 if she transfers her insurance?

ExposingTerribleAdvice

rs65 wrote: »

If a car is being driven under DOC then it is insured to be on the road. Someone driving under DOC will not get an IN10.

Good luck with that.

advantix

I have driven many cars on my DOC extension of my insurance and none of them have had insurance in their own right. They have been taxed and MOT'd. I have been stopped a few times by the police who have told me they have stopped me because the vehicle is showing no insurance. Once i confirm i am driving on MY policy under my DOC extension they agree the vehicle is insured whilst i am driving it and as long as it is parked off the public highway when i am not driving it then no offence is being committed. If i was to get an IN10 for everytime i had driven under the DOC extension i would be finding it impossible to insure anything except rollerskates by now!

flashnazia

advantix wrote: »

I have driven many cars on my DOC extension of my insurance and none of them have had insurance in their own right. They have been taxed and MOT'd. I have been stopped a few times by the police who have told me they have stopped me because the vehicle is showing no insurance. Once i confirm i am driving on MY policy under my DOC extension they agree the vehicle is insured whilst i am driving it and as long as it is parked off the public highway when i am not driving it then no offence is being committed. If i was to get an IN10 for everytime i had driven under the DOC extension i would be finding it impossible to insure anything except rollerskates by now!

Didn't you get a fine for not declaring SORN?

Rules in England, Wales and Scotland
The rules for insuring vehicles are called ‘continuous insurance enforcement’. They mean that if you’re the registered keeper of a vehicle it must be insured or declared as off the road (SORN).

If not, you could:

get a fixed penalty of £100
have your vehicle wheel-clamped, impounded or destroyed
face a court prosecution, with a possible maximum fine of £1,000

rs65

flashnazia wrote: »

Didn't you get a fine for not declaring SORN?

If he is driving a car under DOC then it is not his car. CIE/SORN rules would not apply to him.

advantix

flashnazia wrote: »

Didn't you get a fine for not declaring SORN?

Why would i? Not my car. Only registered keeper / owner is liable for sorn. I was not breaking any law. As i was driving the car under MY insurance then the car was taxed, insured and MOT'd whilst i was driving it therefore legally on the road.

Quentin

flashnazia wrote: »

Leaving out the issues people have with the other poster, the op will surely lose the tax she has on car 1 if she transfers her insurance?

How come ?

Nhuni

Thank you all for all these comments....it's certainly a confusing issue, and no wonder I was going round in circles....while just trying to do the right and lawful thing!

Car 1 is parked on the drive, having just had a test drive...funnily enough, the person who viewed it said he was covered to drive it third party on his own insurance, with my permission...he'd checked with his insurer!

Will wait and see if he wants it...he's calling later!

Quentin

ExposingTerribleAdvice wrote: »

.... I will also advise everyone that from now on they no longer need to MOT their car, or make sure it is a fit state to be on the road. Just because it doesn't state in a policy wording that car must be legal to use on the road for DOC extension to be covered doesn't mean that that's not the case,.....

You tell us that we shouldn't argue with your advice, and give this as a reason:

ExposingTerribleAdvice wrote:

I do A LOT of work with both Aviva and NFU

What kind of "work" (do you go round their local office each night emptying their bins?)

Because if you knew about this the way you claim you do, then you would know that any policy relies on having no mot means its invalid flies in the face of the FOS, and any such condition cannot be enforced to reject a claim, or void a policy.

Conversely, you should know that the car does need to be fit to be on the road ("roadworthy").

Insurers are concerned that the car be roadworthy, but not having tax or MOT cert is irrelevant to the insurer.

Many fraught posters have come here after they have been told that their insurance won't pay out as they let their MOT expire prior to a claim.

I think we may be getting to one source of this myth!

Anyone giving poor advice gets quickly corrected on this board, though sadly only those who read the board see the truth, and those to whom you dispense your poor "advice" are at a disadvantage if they aren't able to read the corrections made here!

FlameCloud

ExposingTerribleAdvice wrote: »

Good luck with that.

For all of your postulating, you have yet to actually evidence your claims at all.

And nice backing down on the policy issues you claim you know about.