Letting someone test drive my car - insurance?

EdGasket

agrinnall wrote: »

For a £900 you might want to take a risk on not having comp cover for the test drive, so if the potential buyer does have their own policy and it gives them 3rd party cover on other vehicles then that may be enough.

As to the busy road issue, my suggestion would be that you drive the car to somewhere quiet then let the buyer take over.

That's poor advice. The 3rd party cover to drive other cars with the owners permission only applies for cars that are insured in their own right; NOT for cars with no insurance at all on them.

AdrianC

EdGasket wrote: »

That's poor advice. The 3rd party cover to drive other cars with the owners permission only applies for cars that are insured in their own right; NOT for cars with no insurance at all on them.

Thanks for the advance warning as to the rest of your post. It's very well established that some - sure, not all - policies DO extend DOC cover to uninsured vehicles.

AndyMc.....

AdrianC wrote: »

There is in the name of the offence he'd be charged with.

Use, cause or permit.

You specify one of the above in the charge.

If the OP allowed it to be driven without insurance for a test drive he wouldn't be causing no insurance.

Tammykitty

agrinnall wrote: »

But, if the vehicle is not insured then it is required to be SORNed, and therefore should not be on the road at all. Perhaps Aviva and AA don't require it as it would be illegal to drive such a car anyway.

Legalities and Insurance are 2 different things.


I would test drive a car if I had insurance, even if the car wasn't taxed!


In fact I drove my mums new (to her) car home with no tax, but I was insured via my own insurance.


She couldn't drive it on her old cars insurance, as the DOC extension did not apply to any car owned by the policyholder or spouse, but I could drive it, as my insurance was valid for any car (even one that wasn't insured).


(PS - this was in NI, where taxing a new car is not available online out of hours - or at least wasn't in August)


I would do it again if the occasion arose.


I would never, however, drive a car without Insurance

jimjames

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Why do you mention causing? It's not like he's making anyone test drive it.

They're handing over the keys so they're enabling the offence. If they refuse to allow it to be driven the offence won't occur

AndyMc.....

jimjames wrote: »

They're handing over the keys so they're enabling the offence. If they refuse to allow it to be driven the offence won't occur

Yes, but not the offence of causing a vehicle to be used without insurance.

Car_54

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Yes, but not the offence of causing a vehicle to be used without insurance.

As already posted, the offence is causing OR permitting. If he permits, he's guilty. He doesn't need to cause.

clue87

If worse comes to worst why dont you just drive it and let them sit in the passenger seat? Thats what I did when I sold my old car off cheap. the buyer spent a good deal of time looking at the car and opened the bonnet whilst the engine was on but didnt actually drive it.

Mercdriver

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Yes, but not the offence of causing a vehicle to be used without insurance.

How is your obtuseness helping the OP?

It isn't making you look clever, so why are you arguing over semantics. If the OP hands over the keys to an uninsured driver, he will get the same penalty as the uninsured driver - 6 points minimum minimum £300 fine on a fixed penalty for permitting.

I sense some dark matters arising perhaps...

AndyMc.....

car_54 wrote: »

as already posted, the offence is [strike]causing or [/strike] permitting. If he permits, he's guilty. He [strike]doesn't need to [/strike] won't cause.

..........👍