Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Syman
    • By Syman 12th Apr 18, 11:09 AM
    • 2,510Posts
    • 6,184Thanks
    Syman
    Use of other vehicles
    • #1
    • 12th Apr 18, 11:09 AM
    Use of other vehicles 12th Apr 18 at 11:09 AM
    When renewing my personal car policy, the question comes up "Do you have access to any other car or van".

    What constitutes access to a vehicle? My insurance company have not yet got back to me through their help pages.

    I work for a local authority, we have a minibus that i may be asked to drive (voluntarily, i.e. i would not be compensated in any way) in the course of my working week.

    I only have access to the vehicle, when specifically granted for an driving task, that is, i cannot just decide to jump in the bus and drive it around.
    Never put off till tomorrow what you can do today!
    Cos if you do it today and like it...You can do it again tomorrow..


    Bookworm's Thread 2018 reading Challenge total :- 60/48
Page 2
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 14th Apr 18, 6:31 AM
    • 3,644 Posts
    • 2,261 Thanks
    Car 54
    It is the person using the vehicle on a road or other public place that is required to have insurance, not the vehicle itself - s.143, 1, (a), Road traffic Act 1988.
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    But the vehicle itself must be insured, under the Motor Vehicle (Insurance Requirements) Regulations 2011. This is the responsibility of the registered keeper, not the driver.
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 14th Apr 18, 8:21 AM
    • 1,390 Posts
    • 630 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    But the vehicle itself must be insured, under the Motor Vehicle (Insurance Requirements) Regulations 2011. This is the responsibility of the registered keeper, not the driver.
    Originally posted by Car 54


    Those regulations introduced s.144A, Road Traffic Act 1988 - the requirement for the vehicle to meet the insurance requirement.


    If the person is using the vehicle with their third party cover which does not require the vehicle to have any other insurance, it would meet that requirement - s.144A (5) of the act.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 14th Apr 18, 9:06 AM
    • 3,644 Posts
    • 2,261 Thanks
    Car 54
    Those regulations introduced s.144A, Road Traffic Act 1988 - the requirement for the vehicle to meet the insurance requirement.


    If the person is using the vehicle with their third party cover which does not require the vehicle to have any other insurance, it would meet that requirement - s.144A (5) of the act.
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    No, it would not. Section 144A(3) requires that an insurance policy must be in force covering either (a) the vehicle identified by reg. number or (b) any vehicle owned by the registered keeper.

    Clearly, a 3rd party driving on his own "driving other cars" policy does not meet either of those.

    Also, as LeeUK pointed out earlier, the vehicle would not be covered once parked!
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 14th Apr 18, 9:19 AM
    • 1,390 Posts
    • 630 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    No, it would not. Section 144A(3) requires that an insurance policy must be in force covering either (a) the vehicle identified by reg. number or (b) any vehicle owned by the registered keeper.
    Originally posted by Car 54

    s.144A (3) is a condition of s.144A (2), s.144A (5) is a separate matter.
    Last edited by Rover Driver; 14-04-2018 at 9:22 AM.
    • Gloomendoom
    • By Gloomendoom 14th Apr 18, 9:40 AM
    • 15,324 Posts
    • 21,213 Thanks
    Gloomendoom
    No, it would not. Section 144A(3) requires that an insurance policy must be in force covering either (a) the vehicle identified by reg. number or (b) any vehicle owned by the registered keeper.

    Clearly, a 3rd party driving on his own "driving other cars" policy does not meet either of those.

    Also, as LeeUK pointed out earlier, the vehicle would not be covered once parked!
    Originally posted by Car 54
    It's not the driver's problem. He is covered while he is driving. Once he gets out of the driving seat, it's the registered keeper's problem.
    Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 14th Apr 18, 9:54 AM
    • 3,644 Posts
    • 2,261 Thanks
    Car 54
    s.144A (3) is a condition of s.144A (2), s.144A (5) is a separate matter.
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    (5) is not a separate matter. It reads "For the purposes of this section ..." and is actually an explanation of the terms used in subsections (1) to (4): it clearly is not intended to be read in isolation.

    If it were, we would have the following absurd situation.

    I own a car which is uninsured, and therefore I am committing an offence.

    My friend borrows it, and drives it away under his own DOC policy. I am no longer committing an offence.

    He parks it and walks away. I am committing an offence again.
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 14th Apr 18, 10:11 AM
    • 1,390 Posts
    • 630 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    (5) is not a separate matter. It reads "For the purposes of this section ..." and is actually an explanation of the terms used in subsections (1) to (4): it clearly is not intended to be read in isolation.
    Originally posted by Car 54

    There are two sub-sections of section 144A which explain where vehicles meet the insurance requirement -


    s.144A (2) plus either (3) or (4),
    or
    s.144A (5), which would apply in the case of a person who is using the vehicle using their valid third party cover.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 14th Apr 18, 2:20 PM
    • 3,644 Posts
    • 2,261 Thanks
    Car 54
    There are two sub-sections of section 144A which explain where vehicles meet the insurance requirement -


    s.144A (2) plus either (3) or (4),
    or
    s.144A (5), which would apply in the case of a person who is using the vehicle using their valid third party cover.
    Originally posted by Rover Driver
    I believe your interpretation is mistaken. If correct, it would lead to the absurd situation I dscribed in my last post. It would also seem to negate the whole point of the new legislation.
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 14th Apr 18, 3:04 PM
    • 1,390 Posts
    • 630 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    Your earlier post could be correct, depending on the circumstances.


    Consider the circumstances of someone who has a vehicle SORN and off road. No insurance (one of the s.144B exceptions), no tax and no MOT.
    A friend, who has valid third party cover, uses the vehicle to take it for a pre-arranged MOT test.
    Insurance would be covered - s.144A (5), as there is a policy of insurance in force in relation to the use of the vehicle, and it would also be exempt from tax and MOT for that journey.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,136Posts Today

8,512Users online

Martin's Twitter