Selling your car? Make sure your buyer is insured!
Discussion
Or you could get banned yourself.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3069607/Mo...
Obviously we all know that this can potentially happen, however if we are being honest how many of us actually check paperwork in order to ensure buyers have 3rd party cover?
In fact as I think about it, given that in this case the buyer died in the accident on the test drive, and not that I would advocate such a thing of course, maybe the seller could have told a porky pie to the effect that he'd asked the driver if he was insured?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3069607/Mo...
Obviously we all know that this can potentially happen, however if we are being honest how many of us actually check paperwork in order to ensure buyers have 3rd party cover?
In fact as I think about it, given that in this case the buyer died in the accident on the test drive, and not that I would advocate such a thing of course, maybe the seller could have told a porky pie to the effect that he'd asked the driver if he was insured?
There is a lot more to this than is reported,
Must have been doing some speed to skid off the road and hit and tree and is killed from the impact, OK not nice.
In regards the insurance bit, even if the prospective buyer turns up with a certificate, how are you supposed to know its a genuine one ?
Are people really going to ring the insurance company and check have cover, that is they can get through 24/7 ?
Maybe its time to go back to the third party cover been the norm or automatic 3rd party insurance cover covered by the state as part of the cost of a driving licence ? Would solve many other insurance problems as well.
Possibly another blow to people selling cars privately, and more people will end up trading cars in
Though ultimately in this case it would not have helped much, and I cant honestly see anything changing on this other than been a few lines in a daily rag.
Must have been doing some speed to skid off the road and hit and tree and is killed from the impact, OK not nice.
In regards the insurance bit, even if the prospective buyer turns up with a certificate, how are you supposed to know its a genuine one ?
Are people really going to ring the insurance company and check have cover, that is they can get through 24/7 ?
Maybe its time to go back to the third party cover been the norm or automatic 3rd party insurance cover covered by the state as part of the cost of a driving licence ? Would solve many other insurance problems as well.
Possibly another blow to people selling cars privately, and more people will end up trading cars in
Though ultimately in this case it would not have helped much, and I cant honestly see anything changing on this other than been a few lines in a daily rag.
Edited by richs2891 on Wednesday 6th May 08:39
HantsRat said:
When selling a car, no one will drive it on the road unless they take out fully comp insurance. 3rd party is all well and good but if they bin the car, they are not liable to pay for the damage.I will happily take them out in the car and drive them myself.
This, all day long..richs2891 said:
In regards the insurance bit, even if the prospective buyer turns up with a certificate, how are you supposed to know its a genuine one ?
The law relies on reasonableness. If you asked to see proof of insurance, and it was produced, then even if it was fake, whilst the driver would be driving without insurance, you as the owner could not be prosecuted for aiding and abetting or inciting and encouraging. richs2891 said:
There is a lot more to this than is reported,
Must have been doing some speed to skid off the road and hit and tree and is killed from the impact, OK not nice.
In regards the insurance bit, even if the prospective buyer turns up with a certificate, how are you supposed to know its a genuine one ?
Are people really going to ring the insurance company and check have cover, that is they can get through 24/7 ?
Maybe its time to go back to the third party cover been the norm or automatic 3rd party insurance cover covered by the state as part of the cost of a driving licence ? Would solve many other insurance problems as well.
Possibly another blow to people selling cars privately, and more people will end up trading cars in
Though ultimately in this case it would not have helped much, and I cant honestly see anything changing on this other than been a few lines in a daily rag.
I think that if you lose it on a bend and hit a tree you may not have to be going that fast to be killed. Trees don't tend to give and something like a side impact at 30-40 mph could easily be fatal.Must have been doing some speed to skid off the road and hit and tree and is killed from the impact, OK not nice.
In regards the insurance bit, even if the prospective buyer turns up with a certificate, how are you supposed to know its a genuine one ?
Are people really going to ring the insurance company and check have cover, that is they can get through 24/7 ?
Maybe its time to go back to the third party cover been the norm or automatic 3rd party insurance cover covered by the state as part of the cost of a driving licence ? Would solve many other insurance problems as well.
Possibly another blow to people selling cars privately, and more people will end up trading cars in
Though ultimately in this case it would not have helped much, and I cant honestly see anything changing on this other than been a few lines in a daily rag.
Edited by richs2891 on Wednesday 6th May 08:39
I suspect that had the owner asked and been shown an insurance certificate then he wouldn't have got into bother. I think it's the fact that he didn't even ask that is the issue.
.EU_Foreigner said:
Does the same apply if money had changed hands and the guy drove away on his own with the car, and the accident then took place or does it no longer matter as he is no longer the owner?
Couldn't possibly apply, could it?Why on earth didn't the vendor just say, "he told me he was fully insured"?
KFC said:
Hackney said:
Couldn't possibly apply, could it?
Why on earth didn't the vendor just say, "he told me he was fully insured"?
This.... the guy is already dead so wasn't going to dispute it, and you're not making his situation any worse are you Why on earth didn't the vendor just say, "he told me he was fully insured"?
KFC said:
Hackney said:
Couldn't possibly apply, could it?
Why on earth didn't the vendor just say, "he told me he was fully insured"?
This.... the guy is already dead so wasn't going to dispute it, and you're not making his situation any worse are you Why on earth didn't the vendor just say, "he told me he was fully insured"?
The removal of 3rd party cover to drive cars not owned by the insured has happened quite quietly.
On my recent renewal, after 55 years of always having this cover without ever having had to ask, I found it had been removed. Just one short sentence in the renewal letter said so. I had to pay an additional amount to have it reinstated. If I had not carefully checked the renewal notice, just assumed it was unchanged as it was a 'renewal' not a new policy, I could have driven other cars in the belief I was covered.
On my recent renewal, after 55 years of always having this cover without ever having had to ask, I found it had been removed. Just one short sentence in the renewal letter said so. I had to pay an additional amount to have it reinstated. If I had not carefully checked the renewal notice, just assumed it was unchanged as it was a 'renewal' not a new policy, I could have driven other cars in the belief I was covered.
HantsRat said:
When selling a car, no one will drive it on the road unless they take out fully comp insurance. 3rd party is all well and good but if they bin the car, they are not liable to pay for the damage.I will happily take them out in the car and drive them myself.
Now we have a desirable car worth some serious money, I'm with this. A test drive will happen only with validated proof of insurance - they'll need to go online and show me the certificate. These things are really easy to fake otherwise.The Mad Monk said:
Because that might not have been the truth?
I wouldn't feel any moral need to tell the truth, and I wouldn't blame anyone else for not doing it either.Given one lost his life and the other lost his car and ended up seriously injured, I'd say the chance of a repeat offence would be pretty slim. Ones gone, the other certainly learned his lesson you'd think
TwigtheWonderkid said:
The law relies on reasonableness. If you asked to see proof of insurance, and it was produced, then even if it was fake, whilst the driver would be driving without insurance, you as the owner could not be prosecuted for aiding and abetting or inciting and encouraging.
It's also possible (Depending on the exact circumstances) to allow use of your vehicle on the condition that it's only used if the driver carries their own insurance. It must be made very clear that use of the vehicle is conditional on having insurance in place.This can be a defence accepted by courts
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff