Access to another vehicle question

thenudeone

Because the Husband has access to another vehicle, The insurer is automatically assuming that in reality that other vehicle is the Husband's main vehicle, and the vehicle you're trying to insure now (in the Husband's name) is really the inexperienced driver's car being "fronted".

It's understandable, and if there were three cars it would be very likely to be true, although with two cars it's less likely.

Answering "no" to the question: does (the husband) have access to other cars, when there is clearly another vehicle which he my be allowed to drive (and has been in the past), even if he's no longer a named driver, could also lead to problems.
If he did have an accident in your car whilst using the DOC cover, they would probably void the policy.

I don't have an easy solution for you. Sorry.

System

But he would only have access if there were no conditions to DOC on his current insurance and his proposed insurance. You can not use the DOC extension to argue that a person has access to another vehicle because somebody else in the household has a vehicle that the proposer is not insured on apart from possibly through DOC. If there is no 'normal' insurance covering him either as a named driver or, as can happen with some company cars, due to any driver then he does not have access.

I.E. If the only way that he can have access to another vehicle is by holding his own insurance on a different vehicle then he does not have access.


Try ringing a few insurance companies (not brokers) and asking.

dacouch

!!!!!! wrote: »

But he would only have access if there were no conditions to DOC on his current insurance and his proposed insurance. You can not use the DOC extension to argue that a person has access to another vehicle because somebody else in the household has a vehicle that the proposer is not insured on apart from possibly through DOC. If there is no 'normal' insurance covering him either as a named driver or, as can happen with some company cars, due to any driver then he does not have access.

I.E. If the only way that he can have access to another vehicle is by holding his own insurance on a different vehicle then he does not have access.


Try ringing a few insurance companies (not brokers) and asking.

Why do the Insurers ask whether you have "access" to another vehicle rather than "are you specifically insured on any other vehicle" ?

The reason being they want to find out what other vehicles the person can drive.

You are more likely to speak to someone who knows what they're talking about at a broker than an Insurers customer service staff.

System

But I can drive ANY vehicle that is covered by my licence groups and is taxed providing that I have the owner's permission. Does that mean that I must always answer yes to the question regardless of circumstances within the household?

The above clearly fits your definition of access.

dacouch

!!!!!! wrote: »

But I can drive ANY vehicle that is covered by my licence groups and is taxed providing that I have the owner's permission. Does that mean that I must always answer yes to the question regardless of circumstances within the household?

The above clearly fits your definition of access.

Obviously not.

The question is asking what cars you have access to, the Ombudsman if presented with a case of such nature is most likely going to rule against the claimant if they answer no to access when they have access to their wive's car via DOC.

The question is used to ascertain how many cars the p/h can drive particuarly in respect of their household cars, generally to underwrite additional young drivers.

rs65

Aviva and DL now ask 'How many cars at your home' or 'How many cars at this address'.

System

rs65 wrote: »

Aviva and DL now ask 'How many cars at your home' or 'How many cars at this address'.

Yikes!
We've got 2 parents, 2 children, 3 main cars, and 2 cars on a classic policy.
Some of us can drive any car, some only one, some just 2.
Does having me a named driver on daughter no. 2's car make her less likely to drive it - no, I've got plenty of other cars to drive for work or fun, but it's useful to have the option.

Insurance companies seem to be slow to catch on to modern trends in multi-generational living.

[Deleted User]

On a side note, what does "Total number of vehicles in the household (including this one)" because when I've previously lived in a flat with someone else (not a partner) who had their own car the answer to this is yes and the insurance company wanted details of their cover otherwise mine would be cancelled even though this person was simply someone I lived with and not a partner or a car I would ever use (driving or as a passenger)

I refused to provide details of someone elses cover which had nothing to do with me so I had to cancel the policy as there revised price went up by approximately 300.

Never understood that one.

bouncydog1

We have 2 parents 1 child, 4 vehicles plus DH has use of works vehicle during working hours - HGV. How do we deal? DD has own car insured in her name, I have 1 in my name and DH has 2 in his. We are all covered to drive each others on the individual policies and make full disclosure to all of the insurers. Result? No loadings for DD being covered on the other high rated vehicles as her use is occasional and recognised as thus by insurers as she is away at UNI with her vehicle, which is also fully disclosed.

Total cost for the 4 around £1k p.a. and all on separate policies rather than multi-car. and we all have DOC extensions, which we would only use in an emergency, because I personally would not want any of us to be liable for the cost of repairing damage to a car I didn't own. When asked the access question insurers are usually concerned about scenarios such as above to ensure there is no fronting.