Sorry - another car insurance question

zebidee1

I'm getting a bit fed up with the minefield that is car inurance.

Why can't all insurers simplify things by being consistant?

On behalf of someone else, I called Direct Line to confirm a driver who holds a comprehensive policy can drive someone else's car (with permission) and still be covered, albeit only third party. I was told, yes, this was the case.

Fine.

Had to call back to query something else and ended up in a chatty conversation with a different Direct Line representative who tells me that you can only drive someone else's car and be covered third party in an emergency situation only.

He says most people assume the third party thing is the norm but it is actually only for use if you HAVE to drive someone else's car.

Now which is it? If different bods in the same company tell me different things, how on earth am I supposed to be legal and above board if I can't be sure what the legalities even are?

Is this standard policy for all companies or do different insurers have different stances on driving other people's cars?

It's so confusing.

alant1000

i'm with privilege, and in the terms it says nothing about emergency only... plus what do they define as an emergency if its not in writing... you need to URGENTLY get to the shops to buy your kids some crisps to shut them up, or you have to rush someone to hospital, or the owner of the car has had too much to drink and would be breaking the law otherwise?? I'd check the terms and conditions that came with the cover note, or maybe see if the Ts and Cs are online, if it states nothing here about emergency only, despite what the call centre agent said you'll be fine.

darich

I agree with Alant - if the policy says you can, then you can. I don't the reason why is a factor.

raskazz

Different insurers do have different approaches to the "driving other cars cover".

From http://www.directline.com/motor/carpolicydoc.pdf

1b Driving other cars
If your certificate of motor insurance says so, this policy provides the
same cover as above in 1a when you are driving any other motor car
as long as you do not own it and it is not hired to you under a hire
purchase or leasing agreement. This cover only applies if:
• there is no other insurance in force which covers the same claim;
• you have the owner’s permission to drive the car;
• the car is registered in and being driven in Great Britain, Northern
Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man or the Channel
Islands; and
• you still have your car and it has not been damaged beyond
cost-effective repair.
If you drive another car under this section, there is no cover
for damage, fire or theft to the car you are driving.

There is no mention of "emergency" - however, the clause makes reference to the certificate of insurance - so check the wording on the certificate too.

shelly

Hubby always has fully comp and when calling for quotes I'm always told "This policy allows the policy holder (not me as named driver) to drive any other car 3rd party only as long as he has owners consent" Iv'e never been told its for emergencies only.

MarkyMarkD

Absolutely no insurer's policy wording states that this cover is for emergency use only.

Either you have the extension, or you don't.

But insurers don't want their customers to take the proverbial and drive around their friend's Lamborghini on their "driving other cars" extension every day of the week. So they might choose to suggest (untruthfully) that there is a restriction to "emergency" use.

Given that the cover is third party only, it is very dangerous to rely on this cover and you must be aware that the vehicle is not covered for damage, fire or theft whilst it's being driven by someone exploiting a "driving other cars" extension.

zebidee1

Thank you everyone. You all posted pretty much what I had thought.

It's a shame this kind of situation (uncertainty with insurance) happens. If insurers were more clear and consistant, life would be so much easier.

MarkyMarkD

I think the issue here is that the "driving other cars" extension DID originally exist to cover "emergency" situations, but it's impossible to word policies to restrict the cover in that way as it's impossible to define what is an emergency.

I've driven my mother's car under a DOC extension because we were returning from a family wedding late at night and she was simply falling asleep - she wasn't safe to be at the wheel. That's clearly an emergency IMHO.

Equally much an emergency is driving someone's car when the owner of the car is over the drink-driving limit.

Really, anything can be defined as an emergency - which is why they don't bother defining it.

ben500

Personally I would never take advantage of this cover unless absolutely desperate, why? Because sure as hell the day you do some muppet is going to hit you, or a shopping trolley caught by wind or influenced by some other force is going to re-design the front bumper, or some charmer will run a key down the side of it and you as the driver are going to have to reimburse the owner due to the lack of cover in such circumstances.
It's a situation to be avoided at all costs if you are not in a position to replace the vehicle in the event something untoward occurs. Get a taxi or hire a vehicle.

raskazz

ben500 wrote: »

Get a taxi or hire a vehicle.

Or if you really need to drive that particular car just ask the policyholder for the car in question to add you to their policy as a temporary additional driver (usually a small additional fee).