Rather unhelpful plod...
Discussion
OJG said:
"This part covers claims made against you.
Cover operates for accidents involving your car or (if you are permitted in the Certificate) while you are driving someone else’s car. If your certificate permits you to drive someone else’s car then it it should only be in the event of an emergency.
THIS SECTION DOES NOT COVER ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE TO YOUR CAR OR THE CAR YOU ARE DRIVING.
quote]
and later:
[quote=OJG]
e) She had read the insurance policy, as she had previously driven my car when she started her placement year from university to move her stuff.
I do think that you've relied too heavily on the third party cover in the past - moving from Uni isn't an emergency, even if the cover had been valid.
I've always understood that this cover was intended to allow you to 'move' a vehicle rather than actually 'use' a vehicle. So, if my understanding is correct, in the situation your gf found herself in, she could have (if necessary) moved the XR2 to a safe place (ie off the road into a car park), but should not have driven it home even if she thought she was covered.
Having said that it's easy to understand the dilemma she found herself in and we have to hope that the magistrate is sympathetic to what is an inadvertant error rather than a blatent offence.
Bobbins said:
I've always understood that this cover was intended to allow you to 'move' a vehicle rather than actually 'use' a vehicle.
Unless specifically stated to the contrary, being able to drive someone else's car on your policy is statutory minimum insurance - ie. third party only.
However, third party cover does allow you to drive a car quite normally in the same way as if you had insured your own car "third party only" (or "third party, fire & theft" if you accept that the "fire & theft" is covered by the car's policy).
Of course, your understanding may be based on a specific exclusion in a policy you have had. But in general you are not correct in thinking that it is "emergency only". Although I will quite agree that you should treat it as such as if you prang someone else's car with only third party cover than you are morally bound to pay for the repairs out of your own pocket.
>> Edited by JonRB on Monday 10th November 23:19
JonRB said:
But in general you are not correct in thinking that it is "emergency only".
I got the "emergency" quote from the OP's quotation of the policy wording.
I do understand that in strict legal terms you'd be OK to drive, but have always considerered it to be something to be avoided. The OP's gf's insurance company limiting the cover by adding the phrase "in the event of an emergency" raises the additional problem of having to decide what consitutes an emergency.
Bobbins said:Absolutely. I don't disagree with you in any respect on the above. It is undoubtably a "last resort" option.
I do understand that in strict legal terms you'd be OK to drive, but have always considerered it to be something to be avoided. The OP's gf's insurance company limiting the cover by adding the phrase "in the event of an emergency" raises the additional problem of having to decide what consitutes an emergency.
Bobbins said:
I've always understood that this cover was intended to allow you to 'move' a vehicle rather than actually 'use' a vehicle.
Nope.. not on any of my policies anyway..
tesco insurance document said:
1. Indemnity to the Policyholder
We will indemnify you against legal liability for damages, claimants costs
and expenses in the event of accident involving:
(a) Your car.
(b) The driving by you, with the owner’s permission, of any motor car not
belonging to you and not hired to you under a hire purchase agreement
provided that:
i. You are entitled by your effective Certificate of Motor Insurance to drive
such a car.
ii. You observe the licence conditions applicable.
iii. There is no other insurance in force which covers the same claim.
iv. The car is being driven in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Republic of
Ireland, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands.
In respect of:
(i) Death of or bodily injury to any person.
(ii) Damage to property.
Cheers
Matt.
toad_oftoadhall said:
she's been in touch with her insurance company, and they insure over 25 as 3rd party on other cars only.
She's 21. Advice on what we do next...??
silverback mike said:
no itall realy 6 points and a fine no ban
I would be very surprised if she gets points fine and a ban for this if it goes to court
Are you sure you understood what is being said here SBM?
Surely driving without insurance is a big issue no matter how much of a good reason there is for doing so?
silverback mike said:
yawn yawn yawn....you saddo. Get yourself a mondeo and drive carefully.
Go shove your head up your ar5e, or play with your sticklebricks.
You are not impressing anyone.
Suggest you obtain a life yourself.
tw@t.
Sorry for the expletives Ted.....
Mike dont rise to it mate
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff