Insurance advice

[steeler]

Does anyone know if this is legal.

Situation:

You have insurance on a 106 (small car) and your policy allows you to drive any other privately owned motor car as long as it is not owned by you.

Does the privately owned motor car need to be insured by the owner to allow you to drive it?

Note: For example say the motor car happens to have a big engine in it

Advice appreciated

 

[pablo]

yes it does mate. insurance companies arent that dumb

 

[rosie]

b4 u insure a 106 and buy a skyline(for example) and try to drive it under ur 106cover its illegal and won't work

 

[steeler]

Worth a try

So if the car is insured by the owner and your cover allows you to drive any car does that mean you can drive it then?

cheers lads

 

[pablo]

yes mate. some people have got high powered cars in their brothers or sisters name and kept a policy on a small car themselves but drove the fast car. Dodgy if caught and proven to be the main driver

 

[steeler]

Aye because on my insurers policy details it doesnt say that the car has to be insured by anyone else, just that you cant own it and it must be roadworthy.

Think an annonemous call to insurers is needed

 

[rosie]

this is a very dodgy situation!!!
I believe over 25 u can drive it 3rd party but only in an emergancy!
under 25 leave it well alone, unless your a named driver on the policy don't drive it!!!

 

[pablo]

some cover under 25s. Quinn being one of them iirc

 

[rosie]

Aye because on my insurers policy details it doesnt say that the car has to be insured by anyone else, just that you cant own it and it must be roadworthy.

Think an annonemous call to insurers is needed

U'll probably need to give all ur details b4 they'll answer ur query

 

[rosie]

some cover under 25s. Quinn being one of them iirc

yeah ur right they do. I looked into that whole situation a few months ago when a crx took my fancy but it was far too risky to chance.
Also I think the insurance company would have asked questions at my mum driving a crx at 58years old and me the polo

 

[steeler]

yup quinn would be 1

No where does it say only in an emergency. Agree yes it is dodgy but know where in writing does it say about this doginess!

Thanks for the advice pablo and rosie

 

[pablo]

heres the problem.

imagine you drive to the garage for a some smokes. you park up and in you go. you are immedietly driving without insurance as youre only covered while actually in the car.

so anyway you didnt put the handbrake on properly and the car rolls into a petrol pump blowing up the place up. youre liable and youre ****ed!

also you cant tax the car because you dont have a cert with the reg on it.

 

[steeler]

see what u mean there but when i got my insurance cert out it does have any make model or registration of a car on it. It says
"Any one vehicle owned by the policyholder or hired to the policyholder under hire purchase agreement or leased to the policyholder under a lease agreement"

Ahh yes so does this mean the vehicle would need to be owned by me to be able to tax it with this policy?

 

[pablo]

you quinn? personally never had a cert that didnt have make/model/reg on it but heard quinn direct didnt.

 

[steeler]

yea its a bit confusing

 

[rosie]

clearly if own and insurance and tax a 106 you cannot do the same to another car using ur 106 policy

think petrol station blowing up lol

 

[steeler]

Kaaaboooom thinkin about it

 

[D4LY]

User Name Says It All

 

[steeler]

lol Steele

 

[brendy]

usually the policy also says that if you drive any other car its thrid party only shich is so not worth the risk.

 

[big cyril]

There used to be a guy on here who worked in insurance and knew all the answers - haven't seen him around for a while. There was a Honda in his avatar IIRC.