Test Drive

[rods]

An employee of mine took a car out for a test drive yesterday and had an accident,the car dealer has asked him to pay for the damage and kept his car until he has paid.
The dealers insurance didn't cover him or so they say,can this be right?
Thanks
Rob

[Mustard]

Sounds like he was insured (dealer would be neglegent(sp) to let him drive if he wasnt, or ask him to provide proof he was prior to the test drive)

I suspect the dealer probably has a high excess (£1k-4k) is pretty much the norm. and is try to cover some of that

As regards ro circumstances and reasons then might warrant a chat with employee/garage

[TripleS]

Wouldn't such damage normally be covered by a comprehensive policy held by the driver in respect of his own car, if driving a car owned by someone else but with their permission?

I can not see that retaining the driver's own car is supported by the legalities, or is it?

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[IOLAIRE]

rods said:

An employee of mine took a car out for a test drive yesterday and had an accident,the car dealer has asked him to pay for the damage and kept his car until he has paid. The dealers insurance didn't cover him or so they say,can this be right? Thanks Rob

Totally untrue.
The dealer will have a Motor Trader's Insurance policy, which covers all employees, salesman, engineers, etc, and prospective buyers who are road testing vehicles.
The dealer is acting completely unlawfully in keeping his car; he can only do so under a right of lien, that is when he is owed a debt by the owner of the vehicle for work he carried out on that vehicle.
Tell your employee to phone the dealer and demand his vehicle back, and if he refuses tell him he will report him to the police for causing and permitting customers to drive his vehicles without insurance; if he doesn't release the car then, he is a real idiot.

[Wacky Racer]

TripleS said:

Wouldn't such damage normally be covered by a comprehensive policy held by the driver in respect of his own car, if driving a car owned by someone else but with their permission?

Assuming the driver(employee) had fully comprehensive insurance in his own name, yes he would be covered, but only basic THIRD PARTY, ie, not for damage to the dealer's car, only to another party he bumped into..........

Imo the dealer, (If he is reputable, and not a back street cowboy) is trying it on.............

You should insist on the return of your car at once........

[IOLAIRE]

Wacky Racer said:

TripleS said: Wouldn't such damage normally be covered by a comprehensive policy held by the driver in respect of his own car, if driving a car owned by someone else but with their permission? Assuming the driver(employee) had fully comprehensive insurance in his own name, yes he would be covered, but only basic THIRD PARTY, ie, not for damage to the dealer's car, only to another party he bumped into.......... Imo the dealer, (If he is reputable, and not a back street cowboy) is trying it on............. You should insist on the return of your car at once........

Sorry Alan, this is not the case.
A great many people have been caught out like this, assuming they were insured to drive any vehicle at all times because they were fully comp.
Every insurance policy carries a clause specifically prohibiting any use relating to the motor trade and testing vehicles, I have never found an exception.
It is the dealers responsibility 100% to ensure that his vehicles are covered for road testing by all prospective buyers.

[Balmoral Green]

IOLAIRE said:

It is the dealers responsibility 100% to ensure that his vehicles are covered for road testing by all prospective buyers.

Quite right, and not only that, the dealer has to be satisfied that the prospective purchaser is in fact entitled to drive, which means actual physical sight of the customers driving licence. No licence - No drive, some dealers do this, but many do not. If the customer does not have their licence on them, they have to sign an indemnity form, then the dealer is at least partially covered if it turns out the customer doesnt have a current valid licence.

Just getting off topic, but when Daewoo were BIG (before it was taken over by GM, the UK network closed and then re-franchised as Chevrolet) no one could take a demo or a loan vehicle unless they were insured either by Daewoos' policy or their own, and that they had their licence on them. Many customers found this to be most inconvenient, but no doubt not as inconvenient as Rods' mate is now finding.




>> Edited by Balmoral Green on Sunday 9th January 13:50

[rods]

Thanks for the advice everyone it seems as though the dealer is trying it on.
Looks like i may have to have words with him tomorrow...

[IOLAIRE]

Balmoral Green said:

IOLAIRE said: It is the dealers responsibility 100% to ensure that his vehicles are covered for road testing by all prospective buyers. Quite right, and not only that, the dealer has to be satisfied that the prospective purchaser is in fact entitled to drive, which means actual physical sight of the customers driving licence. No licence - No drive, some dealers do this, but many do not. If the customer does not have their licence on them, they have to sign an indemnity form, then the dealer is at least partially covered if it turns out the customer doesnt have a current valid licence. Just getting off topic, but when Daewoo were BIG (before it was taken over by GM, the UK netwrok closed and then re-franchised as Chevrolet) no one could take a demo or a loan vehicle unless they were insured either by Daewoos' policy ot their own, and that they had their licence. Many customers found this to be most inconvenient, but no doubt not as inconvenient as Rods' mate is now finding. >> Edited by Balmoral Green on Sunday 9th January 13:48

I would say that you are in fact dead on the topic Warren, coz it's directly relevant to the business of how brutally enforced the law is now on drivers without insurance; remember of course, it doesn't stop just at the driver, the owner of the vehicle is liable under causing and permitting, so I can understand the dealerships caution.
My son's Audi franchise has a policy of no licence, no road test, then everyone is protected.

[rods]

Cheers Warren,i don't have all the facts yet,but as far as i know,he looked at the car,was asked if he would like a test drive and off they went,5 mins later the accident happened.
He was not asked to show his license and nothing was signed.The best thing is he can't even afford the car.