Problem Insuring and Taxing 2 cars

ExposingTerribleAdvice

FlameCloud wrote: »

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.

As another poster suggested earlier, I'll get it in writing for all to see.

FlameCloud

So to be clear-

You are going to provide written evidence from your clients (large insurers) that what they issue in their published contracts is incorrect and that in the event of a claim they will make up their own definition of driving other cars? And furthermore, they actually expect to make it stick come complaint/court time?

Should be interesting I suppose.

flashnazia

advantix wrote: »

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.

But the op owns both cars?

forgotmyname

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.

Quick Q? if i may..

My policy says my DOC only covers me if the other vehicle is insured by its owner or keeper. Cant think what the exact working is. But its one of those.

So if drive a car thats not insured wont i get an IN10 for that?

dacouch

forgotmyname wrote: »

Quick Q? if i may..

My policy says my DOC only covers me if the other vehicle is insured by its owner or keeper. Cant think what the exact working is. But its one of those.

So if drive a car thats not insured wont i get an IN10 for that?

Who are you insured with ?

rs65

forgotmyname wrote: »

Quick Q? if i may..

My policy says my DOC only covers me if the other vehicle is insured by its owner or keeper. Cant think what the exact working is. But its one of those.

So if drive a car thats not insured wont i get an IN10 for that?

In those circumstances you wouldn't be driving under DOC.

dacouch

FlameCloud wrote: »

So to be clear-

You are going to provide written evidence from your clients (large insurers) that what they issue in their published contracts is incorrect and that in the event of a claim they will make up their own definition of driving other cars? And furthermore, they actually expect to make it stick come complaint/court time?

Should be interesting I suppose.

The conversation would be amusing, assuming he actually has some kind of formal business relationship with them and asks an employee who understands their policy.

Could you imagine the conversation, I need to prove [STRIKE]someone[/STRIKE] everyone else wrong. They're telling me that your policy wording does not specify the other car needs to be insured for DOC and that it's not for emergencies. They do not believe me that even though your policy does not state this that it applies. Also could you confirm in writing that it does apply even though the policy wording does not state this.

If I was a senior member of staff who was asked this by a contractor I would be very concerned.

Although saying that, companies such as 1st Central would be more than happy to employ him as they like to try and rely on ridiculous excuses to deny claims against FOS rulings. SO perhaps a job with one such company is needed

dacouch

rs65 wrote: »

In those circumstances you wouldn't be driving under DOC.

Although most of the Insurers that require the other car to be covered do not state this on the RTA Certificate.


http://www.casecheck.co.uk/Default.aspx?tabid=1184&EntryID=17385

Spiderham

dacouch wrote: »

Although most of the Insurers that require the other car to be covered do not state this on the RTA Certificate.


http://www.casecheck.co.uk/Default.aspx?tabid=1184&EntryID=17385

And furthermore if I remember correctly, can't be on the certificate as it is not one the allowed restrictions of a certificate.

dacouch

Spiderham wrote: »

And furthermore if I remember correctly, can't be on the certificate as it is not one the allowed restrictions of a certificate.

I think you may be right, although I've heard of a couple of companies who state the car must be insured on the certificate. Think it may be Axa or Swift

Advice to Third Parties - Nothing contained in this post affects your right as a third party to make a claim...