Driving someone elses car covered on f/c policy?

[Deluded]

I'm insured fully comp on my car. My policy states that I am covered to drive other cars (third party cover) as long as they aren't owned by myself etc.

Now, in the past, when looking into these types of policies, I have heard that this cover is only valid if the owner of the car I want to drive has valid insurance.

The wording on my certificate does not say this, however I am in two minds whether to drive the car or not.

The situation is this. My partner currently drives my Sisters car. We are borrowing it whilst she is working out of the country and have done so for around a year. The car is registered in my partners name. My Sister is coming home at the end of the month and so we are giving the car back. Now, my partners insurance policy runs out this friday. We don't really want to start a new policy on my Sisters car as it will incur extra charges and such when get another seconds car. My partner is a named driver on my car so she will be using mine for work.

On the days she takes my car to work, I need to collect my daughter from her child minder. This requires a car (around 8-9 miles away). My partners car is MOTed and Taxed and will be just sat on the drive.

After friday, it wont have a valid insurance policy directly related to it, although going by the wording on my policy, I will be covered by my own policy when driving it.

Will I get fined if stopped or caught on camera, even though I can legally drive it? Would it be worth keeping my documents on me when driving it? What was that thing about all Taxed cars requiring insurance?

Edited by Deluded on Wednesday 9th November 20:22

[Defcon5]

Best to ring them and check

[Deluded]

I'm confident that I am covered, the wording on my policy is clear and not confusing.

I'm just worried about getting fined by ANPR cameras and such (although I highly doubt there are any hidden in bushes around rural Staffordshire). And I'm sure the police might be interested too.

[Steffan]

The problem here is the PNC checks the police will show the car as uninsured. I carry comp insurance giving me the right to drive any car I do not own and motor traders policy as I have more than 10 cars (not worth a lot) owned by a company of mine. I collect classic cars and classic Kit cars

Therefore I am covered twice. At least; I probably have other covering policies.

But I regularly (3-4 times a year) get pulled because the PNC check fails.

The police are always friendly polite and most apologetic when they see the cover or check with the insurance database. Get very interested in the cars particularly the V8 engine ones. And the racers.

But you will get pulled at some point if you do this. Fact of life today.

[x type]

The answer is not straight forward on this. For a start, The car which is not belonging to you has to be insured by it's owner. Irrespective if you have fully comp insurance.

If you look on your own insurance policy it will tell you if you can drive another car not belonging to you.

But read all the small print too as there are many exceptions to this benefit.

All insurance companies seem to have a slightly different idea so best to speak with your insurer and get it in writing

[U T]

Deluded said:

My partners car is MOTed and Taxed and will be just sat on the drive.

After friday, it wont have a valid insurance policy directly related to it,

Edited by Deluded on Wednesday 9th November 20:22

Under the new continuous insurance enforcement regs, it is an offence to have a car taxed but not insured. So you must either sorn it, in which case you can't drive it because it isn't taxed, or you must insure in with it's own policy.

[Steffan]

U T said:

Deluded said:

My partners car is MOTed and Taxed and will be just sat on the drive.

After friday, it wont have a valid insurance policy directly related to it,

Edited by Deluded on Wednesday 9th November 20:22

Under the new continuous insurance enforcement regs, it is an offence to have a car taxed but not insured. So you must either sorn it, in which case you can't drive it because it isn't taxed, or you must insure in with it's own policy.

Correct. Most of my cars are tax exempt.

[16v stretch]

x type said:

The answer is not straight forward on this. For a start, The car which is not belonging to you has to be insured by it's owner. Irrespective if you have fully comp insurance.

If you look on your own insurance policy it will tell you if you can drive another car not belonging to you.

But read all the small print too as there are many exceptions to this benefit.

All insurance companies seem to have a slightly different idea so best to speak with your insurer and get it in writing

Direct Line drive other car cover is any vehicle irrespective of insurance status. Although with the continuous insurance debacle now it's a bit different I suppose.

Although some policies also stipulate it can't be owned by someone in the same household.

[jagracer]

My wife's insurance came up for renewal last week and I asked them this when I spoke to them. They say she is insured 3rd party on a car not owned by her providing said car has a fully comp policy on it.
My insurance policy reads I am insured 3rd party on a car I don't won providing said car has no policy on it so two different scenarios there, probably best to check with your insurers.

[davepoth]

If it's SORNED that will cause even more of an ANPR issue, even if it's taxed. Considering the amount of hassle it's going to cause, surely it's worth bunging the sister £25 and asking her to reinsure the car a couple of weeks early?

[Great Pretender]

Deluded said:

After friday, it wont have a valid insurance policy directly related to it, although going by the wording on my policy, I will be covered by my own policy when driving it

You won't be.

You can only drive another car on your own insurance policy (TPF) if that car is also insured. The wording on your policy should be clear on this.

You cannot drive a car on the road that isn't directly insured and furthermore it is now illegal to even own a car that is not insured, never mind drive it on the road.

[Deluded]

---

The policyholder may also drive a motor car not belonging to the policyholder and not hired to the policyholder under a hire-purchase agreement or leased to the policyholder under a leasing agreement, provided that;

The policyholder has the owners permission to do so; and

the policyholder still has the vehicle identified above by its registration mark and it has not been damaged beyond economical repair nor been stolen and not recovered; and

the motor car is registered within the geographical limits; and

the policy holder is not using the motor car outside of the geographical limits; and

the policyholder is not insured under any other insurance to drive the motor car.

---

This is the wording exactly as on the policy. There is nothing else.

So as far as I can see, I will be insured to drive the car, but we are committing an offence by having a car that is taxed but without a direct insurance policy.

How is the latter enforced? Would the police be able to enforce this upon a pull over (even though I can provide documents to say I am legally allowed to drive the car) or would it be a letter in the post from the DVLA or some other Nazi driving body?

[U T]

Great Pretender said:

Deluded said:

After friday, it wont have a valid insurance policy directly related to it, although going by the wording on my policy, I will be covered by my own policy when driving it

You won't be.

You can only drive another car on your own insurance policy (TPF) if that car is also insured. The wording on your policy should be clear on this.

You cannot drive a car on the road that isn't directly insured and furthermore it is now illegal to even own a car that is not insured, never mind drive it on the road.

Utter nonsense. Just isn't true. Many driving other cars extensions do allow you to drive a car on the road that doesn't have its own insurance. Some don't. It depends on the wording of your particular driving other cars extension. And of course you can own a car that's not insured. Otherwise the owners of motor musuems and scrap yards would be in big trouble...they own hundreds of uninsured cars.

But you can't have a car with valid road tax that doesn't have it's own insurance (unless it falls under one of the exemptions). And if it doesn't have its own insurance then it can't have tax so you can't drive it on the road legally.

[Meoricin]

Great Pretender said:

You won't be.

You can only drive another car on your own insurance policy (TPF) if that car is also insured. The wording on your policy should be clear on this.

You cannot drive a car on the road that isn't directly insured and furthermore it is now illegal to even own a car that is not insured, never mind drive it on the road.

Yes, he will. If his policy documents say he is, he is. Insurance policies are a contract between the policy holder and the insurance company, and they are governed by what they say, not what other unrelated policies say.

The only issue here is with the tax/insurance requirement - the only way around this would be if the car is tax-exempt, which according to OP, it is (or so I read it).

OP - you'll likely get pulled at some point, and hopefully you don't get a police officer/insurance co spokesperson who is as ill-informed as some of the people in this thread.

[Great Pretender]

U T said:

Utter nonsense. Just isn't true. Many driving other cars extensions do allow you to drive a car on the road that doesn't have its own insurance. Some don't. It depends on the wording of your particular driving other cars extension. And of course you can own a car that's not insured. Otherwise the owners of motor musuems and scrap yards would be in big trouble...they own hundreds of uninsured cars.

But you can't have a car with valid road tax that doesn't have it's own insurance (unless it falls under one of the exemptions). And if it doesn't have its own insurance then it can't have tax so you can't drive it on the road legally.

Ok, but the OP's insurance doesn't expressly state that he can drive other cars that aren't insured by him; only that he can drive other cars with the owner's permission (which is standard policy wording).

I have personal experience of this sadly: I was caught driving a car uninsured after the seven day policy I took out when I bought it lapsed when it should have been extended. I was insured on another car at the time (with identical policy wording to that above) but was found guilty in court for driving without insurance. If you are right, does that mean I was wrongly convicted? I should also ad that I took legal advice, was represented in court and still found guilty.

As for ownership without insurance: you're right; I should have been clearer. The law only applies to cars that are taxed without insurance.

Edited by Great Pretender on Wednesday 9th November 21:26

[Magic919]

The registered keeper will be sent a letter (IAL officially) and get the opportunity to remedy the situation, so don't fret. They only get fined if they don't comply.

[Great Pretender]

Meoricin said:

Yes, he will. If his policy documents say he is, he is. Insurance policies are a contract between the policy holder and the insurance company, and they are governed by what they say, not what other unrelated policies say.

But that's my point: his policy documents don't actually say he can drive the car that isn't insured!

Anyway, this is irrelevant. Assuming the other car is taxed and he wishes to drive it on the public road, he will be doing so illegally.

[U T]

Great Pretender said:

U T said:

Utter nonsense. Just isn't true. Many driving other cars extensions do allow you to drive a car on the road that doesn't have its own insurance. Some don't. It depends on the wording of your particular driving other cars extension. And of course you can own a car that's not insured. Otherwise the owners of motor musuems and scrap yards would be in big trouble...they own hundreds of uninsured cars.

But you can't have a car with valid road tax that doesn't have it's own insurance (unless it falls under one of the exemptions). And if it doesn't have its own insurance then it can't have tax so you can't drive it on the road legally.

I have personal experience of this sadly: I was caught driving a car uninsured after the seven day policy I took out when I bought it lapsed when it should have been extended. I was insured on another car at the time (with identical policy wording to that above) but was found guilty in court for driving without insurance. If you are right, does that mean I was wrongly convicted?

No, you were rightly convicted. The driving other cars extension allows you to drive a car not owned by you. But you were driving a car that was owned by you, so the driving other cars extension on your other policy doesn't cover you, becasuse you weren't driving someone elses car.
You were driving your own car you bought 7 days earlier!!!

[Great Pretender]

U T said:

No, you were rightly convicted. The driving other cars extension allows you to drive a car not owned by you. But you were driving a car that was owned by you, so the driving other cars extension on your other policy doesn't cover you, becasuse you weren't driving someone elses car.
You were driving your own car you bought 7 days earlier!!!

OK fair enough, that makes sense. But firstly, my other point still remains: shouldn't the policy wording expressly state that the insured may drive another car not belonging to him that is not insured for him to be within the law? And if not, why not?

Secondly, surely the above is irrelevant given that the OP wishes to drive a car on the road that is taxed but not insured, which as you said yourself, is now illegal (given that we can assume there are no policy careveouts to the contrary)?

[Deluded]

My insurance covers me to drive the car. If I crash, I would claim off my insurance, not the owners insurance (if there was any).

The car may be uninsured to my partner who is the owner but is insured to me if I get behind the wheel and drive it.

Whoever is right, insurance is stupid.