Supervising learner driver insurance

[x type]

Please can someone help

My daughter is learning to drive , she has her own car (registered in my name because of private plate bought in my name ) insurance are fully aware of this

The car is insured on her own insurance she is down as MAIN driver on provisional licsence to be completely legal

Myself , my wife and eldest daughter are all added as named drivers so we can all drive her car

When we are supervising her , if she feels unwell or can't be ars.. to drive because she has stalled too many times and is fed up , it's not a problem for us to drive home as we are named drivers

BUT my question is ...... if one our friends who is as the website says ......

https://www.gov.uk/driving-lessons-learning-to-dri...

And I quote

Practising with family or friends

Anyone you practise your driving with (without paying them) must:

be over 21

be qualified to drive the type of vehicle you want to learn in, eg they must have a manual car licence if they’re supervising you in a manual car

have had their full driving licence for 3 years

They will meet all of the above


BUT and this is my question

it doesn't say IF the supervisor has to be insured to drive my daughters car be it as a named driver on daughters insurance or by having their own drive other vehicles on their policy

So does the friend have to be insured to drive my daughters car ?
The internet is telling me all sorts

this one says yes

http://www.helpingldrivers.com/private-practice/th...

But others say no

[surveyor_101]

If you are insured on your own policy 3rd party and or are named on her policy and hold a full valid licence to drive that type of vehicle then drive away.

[ging84]

x type said:

Please can someone help

My daughter is learning to drive , she has her own car (registered in my name because of private plate bought in my name ) insurance are fully aware of this

The car is insured on her own insurance she is down as MAIN driver on provisional licsence to be completely legal

Myself , my wife and eldest daughter are all added as named drivers so we can all drive her car

When we are supervising her , if she feels unwell or can't be ars.. to drive because she has stalled too many times and is fed up , it's not a problem for us to drive home as we are named drivers

BUT my question is ...... if one our friends who is as the website says ......

https://www.gov.uk/driving-lessons-learning-to-dri...

And I quote

Practising with family or friends

Anyone you practise your driving with (without paying them) must:

be over 21

be qualified to drive the type of vehicle you want to learn in, eg they must have a manual car licence if they’re supervising you in a manual car

have had their full driving licence for 3 years

They will meet all of the above


BUT and this is my question

it doesn't say IF the supervisor has to be insured to drive my daughters car be it as a named driver on daughters insurance or by having their own drive other vehicles on their policy

So does the friend have to be insured to drive my daughters car ?
The internet is telling me all sorts

this one says yes

http://www.helpingldrivers.com/private-practice/th...

But others say no

What is the friend meant to be doing here?
Driving the car or supervising your daughter driving her car

Are you honestly asking if someone can drive a little princess home in her car because her clutchy footy is too hurty, without needing to be insured?

[sebhaque]

I asked a similar question a couple of years ago and got some very good advice. While not a legal requirement, given that you're supervising a learner, it's not really worth supervising if you can't take over. Any situation where the learner panics (can't be arsed-ness aside) or needs an experienced driver for help, which is somewhat likely, will result in having to (legally) dump the car in situ since you can't drive it.

For reference:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[snorky782]

surveyor_101][b said:

If you are insured on your own policy 3rd party[\b] and or are named on her policy and hold a full valid licence to drive that type of vehicle then drive away.

I know what you're trying to say, but that is nowhere near what you think you're trying to say.

What you mean is:

If you have DOC as part of your existing motor policy, then you might have been OK. However, as this car is registered to you, then you can not use that extension, as it is one of the standard exclusions.

If it's your friend and he had a valid DOC option, then he can use that if needed, but will only be covered third party (i.e. damage to other vehicles, not yours / daughters).

[scorcher]

x type said:

So does the friend have to be insured to drive my daughters car ?
The internet is telling me all sorts

this one says yes

http://www.helpingldrivers.com/private-practice/th...

But others say no

Your friend only needs insurance if she is going to drive it. If she is only supervising then your daughter has a policy to drive the car as long as the supervisor fits the age and experiece criteria.
If your friend needs to drive your daughter home for whatever reason she'll need at least a "driving other cars" extension on her own vehicle policy to be covered third party only.

[surveyor_101]

snorky782 said:

I know what you're trying to say, but that is nowhere near what you think you're trying to say.

What you mean is:

If you have DOC as part of your existing motor policy, then you might have been OK. However, as this car is registered to you, then you can not use that extension, as it is one of the standard exclusions.

If it's your friend and he had a valid DOC option, then he can use that if needed, but will only be covered third party (i.e. damage to other vehicles, not yours / daughters).

Thanks I missed its her car but reg in daddies name, never understand the obsession with private plates and all the fees and buggeration they cause.

[x type]

scorcher said:

x type said:

So does the friend have to be insured to drive my daughters car ?
The internet is telling me all sorts

this one says yes

http://www.helpingldrivers.com/private-practice/th...

But others say no

Your friend only needs insurance if she is going to drive it. If she is only supervising then your daughter has a policy to drive the car as long as the supervisor fits the age and experiece criteria.
If your friend needs to drive your daughter home for whatever reason she'll need at least a "driving other cars" extension on her own vehicle policy to be covered third party only.

Thank you for that answer it's what I thought the legal bit should be

[x type]

ging84 said:

x type said:

Please can someone help

My daughter is learning to drive , she has her own car (registered in my name because of private plate bought in my name ) insurance are fully aware of this

The car is insured on her own insurance she is down as MAIN driver on provisional licsence to be completely legal

Myself , my wife and eldest daughter are all added as named drivers so we can all drive her car

When we are supervising her , if she feels unwell or can't be ars.. to drive because she has stalled too many times and is fed up , it's not a problem for us to drive home as we are named drivers

BUT my question is ...... if one our friends who is as the website says ......

https://www.gov.uk/driving-lessons-learning-to-dri...

And I quote

Practising with family or friends

Anyone you practise your driving with (without paying them) must:

be over 21

be qualified to drive the type of vehicle you want to learn in, eg they must have a manual car licence if they’re supervising you in a manual car

have had their full driving licence for 3 years

They will meet all of the above


BUT and this is my question

it doesn't say IF the supervisor has to be insured to drive my daughters car be it as a named driver on daughters insurance or by having their own drive other vehicles on their policy

So does the friend have to be insured to drive my daughters car ?
The internet is telling me all sorts

this one says yes

http://www.helpingldrivers.com/private-practice/th...

But others say no

What is the friend meant to be doing here?
Driving the car or supervising your daughter driving her car

Are you honestly asking if someone can drive a little princess home in her car because her clutchy footy is too hurty, without needing to be insured?

Sorry but what are you trying to say?

Are you honestly asking if someone can drive a little princess home in her car because her clutchy footy is too hurty, without needing to be insured?

I just want to make sure everything is legal if my daughter for what ever reason could not or didn't want to drive her car whilst being supervised

[ging84]

x type said:

Sorry but what are you trying to say?

Are you honestly asking if someone can drive a little princess home in her car because her clutchy footy is too hurty, without needing to be insured?

I just want to make sure everything is legal if my daughter for what ever reason could not or didn't want to drive her car whilst being supervised

So yes you really are asking that.
Unbelievable, you honestly though there was a chance that you don't need insurance to drive someone's car if you happened to give them a free driving lesson earlier?

The reason no site makes it very clear, is because it's a completely absurd idea you have cooked up, they don't make it clear if you do or do not need insurance on the 29th of February, because no normal person would assume anything other than of course you do.

[R0G]

A supervising driver who meets the criteria listed earlier in this thread does not need to be insured unless they are going to drive

This happens more with B+E where you can get a B licence holder towing a B+E set up with 99 year old great grand parent sitting in the passenger seat 'supervising'

[Ki3r]

surveyor_101 said:

Thanks I missed its her car but reg in daddies name, never understand the obsession with private plates and all the fees and buggeration they cause.

Worth double checking, I've phoned insurance companies up who ask who the owner/RK is, so it does make a difference.

[x type]

ging84 said:

So yes you really are asking that.
Unbelievable, you honestly though there was a chance that you don't need insurance to drive someone's car if you happened to give them a free driving lesson earlier?

The reason no site makes it very clear, is because it's a completely absurd idea you have cooked up, they don't make it clear if you do or do not need insurance on the 29th of February, because no normal person would assume anything other than of course you do.

No need to take the pi.. is there ?

If it was your son / daughter in the same situation
would you be happy with the supervisor to have to drive the car , stopped by the police on a routine check ,found the supervisor wasn't legally insured and have "THE LITTLE PRINCESS CAR " towed away ?

Edited by x type on Thursday 30th June 19:25

[BertBert]

How hard can it be? If you are going to drive the car, you need to be insured. If you are supervising not driving, then er you don't need to be.
Bert

[mph1977]

snorky782 said:

surveyor_101][b said:

If you are insured on your own policy 3rd party[\b] and or are named on her policy and hold a full valid licence to drive that type of vehicle then drive away.

I know what you're trying to say, but that is nowhere near what you think you're trying to say.

What you mean is:

If you have DOC as part of your existing motor policy, then you might have been OK. However, as this car is registered to you, then you can not use that extension, as it is one of the standard exclusions.

If it's your friend and he had a valid DOC option, then he can use that if needed, but will only be covered third party (i.e. damage to other vehicles, not yours / daughters).

that sums the scenario up

[ferrariF50lover]

This thread is absolutely typical PH (and the reason I keep coming here). A bunch of vastly inferior intellects completely misunderstanding a simple question and then having the temerity to behave as if they are, in fact, vastly superior intellects. Thank you,

The question the OP is asking is very simple and while I don't know the answer, at least I can fking read.

The answer, I would suggest, is that your mate needs to ask the question of their insurers are get their answer in writing.

As an aside, it's all a bloody faff, this insurance lark. Can we not adopt a situation (similar to Australia?) where the car, not the driver, is insured? The car is the constant in any incident where the insurance might matter, why base cover on the variable and make the whole system 1000000 times as complicated as it need be?

[mph1977]

ferrariF50lover said:

The car is the constant in any incident where the insurance might matter, why base cover on the variable and make the whole system 1000000 times as complicated as it need be?

except it's quite clearly not .

[Red Devil]

Be careful what you wish for. I reckon you would see increased premiums across the entire spectrum.
Just as would happen with abolishing VED and replacing it with an increase in fuel duty.

[snorky782]

Red Devil said:

Be careful what you wish for. I reckon you would see increased premiums across the entire spectrum.
Just as would happen with abolishing VED and replacing it with an increase in fuel duty.

Agreed, I would say that it's an absolute certainty that all insurance would rise significantly , if every single car had to be insured for anybody at all to be able to drive it.

[mph1977]

snorky782 said:

Red Devil said:

Be careful what you wish for. I reckon you would see increased premiums across the entire spectrum.
Just as would happen with abolishing VED and replacing it with an increase in fuel duty.

Agreed, I would say that it's an absolute certainty that all insurance would rise significantly , if every single car had to be insured for anybody at all to be able to drive it.

why do you think domestic 'any driver' policies are virtually unavailable these days ... and while there are business 'any driver' policies for cars and cat B vans , the business has to consider corporate manslaughter and PUWER as well as various 'guidance' from the HSE and other government depts...