Motor trade insurance query

[rockford22]

If a motor trader insurance policy allows a holder to drive any vehicle in relation to the motor industry but the vehicles are not individually listed on a policy...how does this work with ANPR and AskMID?

Particularly querying in relation to a car I will be handing over to my local dealership on a sale or return basis...Can I cancel my own policy and rely on theirs if stolen from their premesis or crashed on test drive or should I keep my own policy in place.

[Gavia]

A trader will either have direct access to MID to update their stock, or will need to keep their insurer up to date on all cars in stock that are being used on the road. The policies where the trader, just said “yeah it’s in my stock” are long gone.

I’d keep your own policy in place. Trade policies pay out trade value only, not retail.

[anonymous-user]

If you have any doubt about their insurance coverage definitely don't let them take the car on sale or return.

[rockford22]

Gavia said:

A trader will either have direct access to MID to update their stock, or will need to keep their insurer up to date on all cars in stock that are being used on the road. The policies where the trader, just said “yeah it’s in my stock” are long gone.

Perfect, thanks.

[Gavia]

rockford22 said:

Gavia said:

A trader will either have direct access to MID to update their stock, or will need to keep their insurer up to date on all cars in stock that are being used on the road. The policies where the trader, just said “yeah it’s in my stock” are long gone.

Perfect, thanks.

Make sure you read the extra bit I added

[Mr Tidy]

TBH I wouldn't want to sell on an SOR basis - I'd rather advertise privately, sell to a trader/part-ex/etc.

Too many imponderables IMO.

[V8RX7]

My Trade insurance only asks for details of cars that I use on a regular basis hence I don't put untaxed stock (95% of cars) on.

We then have to carry our insurance details - I would mention I only know of one trader who has ever been pulled. ANPR is massively over hyped I know many who have let tax / mot run out for months without issue.

[4rephill]

Mr Tidy said:

TBH I wouldn't want to sell on an SOR basis - I'd rather advertise privately, sell to a trader/part-ex/etc.

Too many imponderables IMO.

A trader/part-ex will get you the least amount of money possible for your car as the person buying it is looking to make a profit on the car.

Selling privately means you have to pay for adverts here there and everywhere, put up with loads of phone calls/emails asking about the car (most of which always seem to come after you've actually sold the car!), make sure you're available for buyers to come to view the car (which usually means hanging around for hours on end, and quite often ends with no one turning up!), put up with a load of time wasters who just want to try your car, and run the risk of getting scammed - losing both your car and the money in the process.

Selling through a reputable, well established dealership on a SOR basis means that you don't have to pay for loads of adverts, you don't have to deal with all of the phone calls/emails, you don't have to stay in for hours on end waiting/hoping for buyers to turn up, you don't have to deal with the time wasters and test pilots, and you should have a bit more protection from being scammed (no guarantee's there though!).

Added to that, a dealer can often ask for, and get more money for the car than selling privately would yield (even after taking their cut out from the sale), they are more used dealing with prospective buyers and haggling, and, with high end cars, a lot of buyers prefer buying from a reputable, established dealer rather than a private individual.

In my experience over the years, selling cars privately is a complete pain in the arse, whilst selling through a reputable, well established dealer was absolutely painless!

[voicey]

rockford22 said:

Particularly querying in relation to a car I will be handing over to my local dealership on a sale or return basis...Can I cancel my own policy and rely on theirs if stolen from their premesis or crashed on test drive or should I keep my own policy in place.

You should read the SoR contract carefully - it should state who is responsible for insuring the car. Our contracts state that we will fully insure the car whilst the contract is in force.

[grumpy52]

If you wish to keep the car covered by your own insurance I would recommend contacting your insurance company ,I would be surprised if it provided that sort of cover .

[bradjsmith88]

There is a loophole somewhere in the legislation - but I can't remember exactly where that says Motor Traders do not need to add vehicles to the MID unless they are in their possession for 14 days or longer.

Referred to here: https://www.mib.org.uk/media/136001/mid-broker-gui...

[bradjsmith88]

And in answer to your original question about if your car is stolen from them, you will need to ask them what their policy will cover. And also check your own, as it may not cover loss/damage whilst your vehicle is with the motor trade (most do but not all...)

[V8RX7]

bradjsmith88 said:

There is a loophole somewhere in the legislation - but I can't remember exactly where that says Motor Traders do not need to add vehicles to the MID unless they are in their possession for 14 days or longer.

Referred to here: https://www.mib.org.uk/media/136001/mid-broker-gui...

That's interesting as that is NOT what my insurers told me (I'll contact them tomorrow)

If one was to check cars for sale with Dealers you would find the majority aren't on the MID so it seems I'm not the only one who hasn't been putting them on.

[anonymous-user]

V8RX7 said:

That's interesting as that is NOT what my insurers told me (I'll contact them tomorrow)

If one was to check cars for sale with Dealers you would find the majority aren't on the MID so it seems I'm not the only one who hasn't been putting them on.

If you want to drive them you should put them on.

It's a bit of a dog's breakfast but effectively anything a trader wants covered on the motor section of his motor trade policy should be on the MID - unless it's temporarily in their custody eg a customer car for repair.

A trader may not even have road risks cover and be adequately covered if his policy has cover for stock/customer vehicles on the premises.

[V8RX7]

desolate said:

If you want to drive them you should put them on.

Generally I agree.

I was talking about stock - ie cars that will only be driven a couple of times, on test drives, around the block

That link seems to say EVERY car should be listed if it's insured - whether on the road or not

[anonymous-user]

V8RX7 said:

Generally I agree.

I was talking about stock - ie cars that will only be driven a couple of times, on test drives, around the block

That link seems to say EVERY car should be listed if it's insured - whether on the road or not

If it's not taxed it should be sorn.
If it's taxed it should be on the MID.

[V8RX7]

desolate said:

If it's not taxed it should be sorn.
If it's taxed it should be on the MID.

Trade don't sorn
https://www.gov.uk/sorn-statutory-off-road-notific...

We drive on test drives with trade plates (which are on the MID)

[anonymous-user]

V8RX7 said:

Trade don't sorn
https://www.gov.uk/sorn-statutory-off-road-notific...

We drive on test drives with trade plates (which are on the MID)

Yes I used the wrong terminology - when it's "sold to a motor trader" it isn't technically sorned, but it still isn't taxed.

So you need to tax it or drive it on your trade plate.

This is what I mean about it being a dog's breakfast. The vehicle can be legitimately insured and it won't appear on any database.