Insurance as a named driver.
Insurance as a named driver.
Author
Discussion

quiraing

Original Poster:

1,649 posts

165 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all

Would appreciate a bit of advice here please.

Scenario -
Husband buys car for wife (several years ago).
Car is registered in wife's name.

Wife is insured as main driver TPF&T with husband as the only named driver. Husband obviously has permission to use the car at any time.

Temporary parting of ways between husband and wife, and husband has sole use of car during this period.

If wife was to have husband's name removed from insurance policy without telling him how would he stand if he was regularly still using the car?

Any replies much appreciated.


rigga

8,805 posts

227 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all
He would be uninsured. .....



dingg

4,506 posts

245 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all
simple really he's not insured so would be in the st

Jujuuk68

364 posts

183 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all
Even now, he isn't the main user of the car, and so is taking advantage of someone else's no claims bonus to have cover to drive. She may own the car but it effectively his. In which case the policy could be voided back to inception and he is only Article 75 covered in the event of an accident.

So even now, if he was in a significant accident requiring an investigation, he may not be covered. The insurers are only being paid for the risk of the vehicles main user being the careful female with a good no claims?




quiraing

Original Poster:

1,649 posts

165 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all

Ok, thanks very much for posts, very helpful.

GC8

19,910 posts

216 months

Saturday 25th May 2013
quotequote all
Not so simple, in my opinion. Whist he would be uninsured, then he would have the grounds for a special reasons argument. Had he been caught then he would have needed a specialist motoring solicitor, rather than a fellow who did divorces and conveyancing too.

Noger

7,117 posts

275 months

Monday 27th May 2013
quotequote all
"Causing or permitting" for her. Some sort of absolute discharge for him.


GC8

19,910 posts

216 months

Monday 27th May 2013
quotequote all
Itd be nice to see that sort of spiteful behaviour pursued, but Id be surprised. Its an easy charge in some circumstances and thats where they use it.

ging84

9,548 posts

172 months

Monday 27th May 2013
quotequote all
does he have the insurance certificate in his possession? he might be able to form a defence on that basis, or may even still be able to argue he was still insured if the insurer cannot demonstrate that the policy holder complied with the requirement for surrendering the insurance certificate or declaring it lost or destroyed.

GC8

19,910 posts

216 months

Monday 27th May 2013
quotequote all
espite being correct, I doubt that anyone will acknowledge the certificate means insured defence now.