New driver car insurance question

[Barry Shnikov]

MIB wouldn't chase up £50. Wouldn't chase up £5k unless there was 101% chance of recovery. Most uninsured drivers don't have anything of worth so their way of thinking is why rack up costs. But you point is correct. Not worth the risk

Agreed.

But if the MIB have someone in their sights who is a homeowner, I bet they go after them. Judgment, charge, order for sale...

[Barry Shnikov]

If you say "you better have your own insurance" then you are putting a condition on the driving of it. If there was an accident though, the claim would still come off your insurance unless you explicibly stated that they only have permission to drive if they had their own insurance.

If you allow someone to drive your car, then you give them permission to claim on your insurance. Nothing you can do about it.

Well...

It's unlawful to have two policies in place to cover the same eventuality (except for life insurance or where each policy covers a portion of the risk), so in theory if A was covered to drive B's car and also B was covered for other drivers, there would have to be a prior agreement as to which policy was in force for the purpose of that trip...

[stewart38]

If you say "you better have your own insurance" then you are putting a condition on the driving of it. If there was an accident though, the claim would still come off your insurance unless you explicibly stated that they only have permission to drive if they had their own insurance.

If you allow someone to drive your car, then you give them permission to claim on your insurance. Nothing you can do about it.

You an underwriter? Where do you work?

yes you need a 'condition' otherwise your probably going to have implied consent

Basically if someone is Test driving your car (and your with them) you could be seen to be giving implied permission to drive it. if someone steals your car and you hanging onto the front bonnet the assumption is your not

If i said to Gav you can drive my car but you better have your own insurance what happens ?? Its only verbal ?

assume

a) he lies and hasnt got any Insurance and is a danger on the roads
b) where does a innocent third party stand when Gav runs into them a level crossing at 75mph (no damage to my car).

Third party wording have changed a lot last few years so forget refences to age his expereince etc

[TurboTomato]

There are companies out there that will cover you for insurance by the day, or week, not a cheap option, but maybe worth a look if you plan to test drive a selection of cars.

Greg

When I bought a car last year I used Short Term Car and Van Insurance from dayinsure.com to give me a days insurance (£10 or £15, I forget) to get it home when I collected it. It's not too expensive so maybe worth using something like that.

Just to re-iterate what the others have said - if you're buying from a dealer you'll be fine as it's their insurance that covers you but buying privately is different. As far as I'm aware very few people have insurance that covers anyone (given permission) to drive their car (most likely company cars and the like) so you can never assume that. Insuring the car before test driving and buying isn't really feasible given you may not like it and not want to buy it so I'd either use something like the day insure or get a friend to test drive for you. When it comes to the test drive itself try to get a decent length one with a mix of slow town driving and higher speeds as well so that you get a good feel for the car in all conditions. Good luck

PS Don't forget to do a HPI check on the car as well, well worth it for £10 and will show up if the car has been written off, stolen or has any credit remaining against it.

[stewart38]

Well...

It's unlawful to have two policies in place to cover the same eventuality (except for life insurance or where each policy covers a portion of the risk), so in theory if A was covered to drive B's car and also B was covered for other drivers, there would have to be a prior agreement as to which policy was in force for the purpose of that trip...

Ok

you have any driver on your car (not that common now days)

On my Comp ive got third party cover to drive any other vehicle

you give me permission to drive your car, your with me

I get in you car drive at a safe sound 45mph ,get hit by Gav who is driving in my own car at 75mph with my twin stewart42 in the passenger seat, i then because of Gav hitting your car that im driving hit a bus queue .We both say in court the we thought the other person within the car was picking up the Insurance .

who pays out what

stewart42 , Gav caused the accident
stewart38 Gav isnt Insured
Barry he is a nice guy
Gav gets sued then it with MIB as he hasnt cover but said he has

could stewart42 rely on in court that he was sure Gav had his own insurance, ie would that stand ??Not much protection for third parties is it ??

[TurboTomato]

yes you need a 'condition' otherwise your probably going to have implied consent

Basically if someone is Test driving your car (and your with them) you could be seen to be giving implied permission to drive it. if someone steals your car and you hanging onto the front bonnet the assumption is your not

If i said to Gav you can drive my car but you better have your own insurance what happens ?? Its only verbal ?

assume

a) he lies and hasnt got any Insurance and is a danger on the roads
b) where does a innocent third party stand when Gav runs into them a level crossing at 75mph (no damage to my car).

Third party wording have changed a lot last few years so forget refences to age his expereince etc

Would be interested on your thoughts on this one stewart:

Had a friend selling his BMW - punter comes along and they go out for a test drive. Friend drives initially and then pulls over to swap (keys still in ignition). As the friend gets out something along these lines happens (not sure exactly what) - punter closes passenger door and gets into the drivers side before friend can get back in and locks the doors. Punter floors it and friend never sees the car again. Worse still, from what I hear the insurance company refused to pay out, citing deception I think...

[stewart38]

When I bought a car last year I used Short Term Car and Van Insurance from dayinsure.com to give me a days insurance (£10 or £15, I forget) to get it home when I collected it. It's not too expensive so maybe worth using something like that.

I tell you what with the massive clamp down on road Tax evasion etc etc

These guys will make a mint

[Gav]

stewart's examples

I hadn't realised I was such a bad driver! That's it, public transport for me from now on

[Barry Shnikov]

Ok

you have any driver on your car (not that common now days)

On my Comp ive got third party cover to drive any other vehicle

you give me permission to drive your car, your with me

I get in you car drive at a safe sound 45mph ,get hit by Gav who is driving in my own car at 75mph with my twin stewart42 in the passenger seat, i then because of Gav hitting your car that im driving hit a bus queue .We both say in court the we thought the other person within the car was picking up the Insurance .

who pays out what

stewart42 , Gav caused the accident
stewart38 Gav isnt Insured
Barry he is a nice guy
Gav gets sued then it with MIB as he hasnt cover but said he has

could stewart42 rely on in court that he was sure Gav had his own insurance, ie would that stand ??Not much protection for third parties is it ??

Erm - Shergar? oh, sorry, wait - that was a different question...

[StokeBloke]

Remember: It is the vehicle owner's responsibility to ensure that anyone who uses their vehicle has appropriate insurance. Failing to do so may give rise to being prosecuted for permitting the use of a motor vehicle without third party insurance. You are likely to get the same penalty in court as the person who was using the vehicle at the time. Worth remembering if you sell a vehicle and someone asks for a test drive.

[Barry Shnikov]

{snip Krypton factor style insurance puzzler}

Answer is: prime cause pays, unless there are novi acti intervenientes (thanks, schoolboy latin!) which oblige other drivers to shell out proportionally.

The point about the agreement is that if there is an agreement between A and B that A's insurance applies, but A is lying and hasn't got any, B's insurance will pay out and B or his insurer can then sue seven bells out of A for contribution. If A has got insurance, then his insurer will pay unless it believes (and has some evidence) that there was no such agreement, because the usual rule would be B's insurer pays.

[Gav]

Answer is: prime cause pays, unless there are novi acti intervenientes (thanks, schoolboy latin!) which oblige other drivers to shell out proportionally.

The point about the agreement is that if there is an agreement between A and B that A's insurance applies, but A is lying and hasn't got any, B's insurance will pay out and B or his insurer can then sue seven bells out of A for contribution. If A has got insurance, then his insurer will pay unless it believes (and has some evidence) that there was no such agreement, because the usual rule would be B's insurer pays.

But what if person C, whose pet cat Eric was upset by all the arguing? and would it be made simpler if person C changed Eric's name to Roger? and finally, does that answer your question Twirly?

By the way, the best answer on this whole thread was to ask the AA or the RAC!

[Barry Shnikov]

Would be interested on your thoughts on this one stewart:

Had a friend selling his BMW - punter comes along and they go out for a test drive. Friend drives initially and then pulls over to swap (keys still in ignition). As the friend gets out something along these lines happens (not sure exactly what) - punter closes passenger door and gets into the drivers side before friend can get back in and locks the doors. Punter floors it and friend never sees the car again. Worse still, from what I hear the insurance company refused to pay out, citing deception I think...

This turned up on The real hustle.

The insurer would have to pay up if the policy insured against theft unless our hero had overlooked the clause in the policy that says "If you hand the keys to the person who drives the car away, that isn't theft, it's effin' stupidity!"

Seriously, policies have exclusions. This is to encourage the insured to follow good practice. If your house goes up in smoke because you decided to burn all your credit card bills in a pile in the carpet, don't be surprised if the insurer considers that that particular risk wasn't covered.

Your keys are in your pocket, someone lifts them and drives your car away. That's theft, as in the criminal act; it is almost certainly covered by a theft policy. You give your keys to someone to get something out of your car, he drives it away. That still constitutes the crime of theft, but it probably isn't covered by a theft policy.

[Barry Shnikov]

But what if person C, whose pet cat Eric was upset by all the arguing?

...repeat after me: a sentence requires a subject, and object - and a verb!

[Gav]

...repeat after me: a sentence requires a subject, and object - and a verb!

and never start a sentence with 'but' or 'and', however in modern language a gerund will often suffice, but more importantly and by far my favourite argument...

Shut it G1t face!

[stewart38]

But what if person C, whose pet cat Eric was upset by all the arguing? and would it be made simpler if person C changed Eric's name to Roger? and finally, does that answer your question Twirly?

By the way, the best answer on this whole thread was to ask the AA or the RAC!

This is a court of law

what id really want to know is how many people play party poker on line , mainly Texas Hold Em

[TurboTomato]

This turned up on The real hustle.

The insurer would have to pay up if the policy insured against theft unless our hero had overlooked the clause in the policy that says "If you hand the keys to the person who drives the car away, that isn't theft, it's effin' stupidity!"

Seriously, policies have exclusions. This is to encourage the insured to follow good practice. If your house goes up in smoke because you decided to burn all your credit card bills in a pile in the carpet, don't be surprised if the insurer considers that that particular risk wasn't covered.

Your keys are in your pocket, someone lifts them and drives your car away. That's theft, as in the criminal act; it is almost certainly covered by a theft policy. You give your keys to someone to get something out of your car, he drives it away. That still constitutes the crime of theft, but it probably isn't covered by a theft policy.

Well this is totally real as far as I know - he was a team leader at the company I used to work for and the car in question was an 03 reg 328 Coupe. No payout was what I heard as well (this was all through a mutual friend, haven't spoken to him myself)

Am awaiting a coded message from S38 (or S42, not sure which)

[Lee Bartholomew]

OK, You give someone keys to get something out of your car and they take it? It's theft.

They hit something, your insurance pays out. 9/10 it will affect your no claims. Is this fair? No if it's your insurance, yes if it's you they hit.

There is a lower form of cover than TPO (third Party Only) which is commonly refered to as RTA. It basicaly meets the minimum levels of insurance required and covers whats known as special damages (injuries, loss of earnings etc) but does not cover whats known as generals (damage to property, bus fares etc).

This is what the MIB covers through their uninsured driver section (where I worked dealing with the claims for a few years so I do have some knowledge). they also had an untraced driver section which does pretty much the same thing but with hit and runs n stuff.

[Twirly]

Just thought I’d follow up on this – I take delivery of a little silver Ford Fiesta on Wednesday evening am soooo excited. Means that I’ll be able to get to all sorts of places… and all sorts of dance places that I couldn’t get to before.

Will also be looking for people to navigate to said dance places, as at the moment, driving is enough of a challenge, never mind navigating as well (though the one place that I do know how to get to by car is Greenwich ).

Beo, bring your compass down at Easter – we may be needing it!

Thanks again for the advice folks

[Beowulf]

Beo, bring your compass down at Easter – we may be needing it!

She's relying on me for directions? ach We're doooooooommmmed!

Straycat's post about the woman and the Sat nav may be repeated

"erm turn left..."
*Twirly turns left*
"Erm.. no sorry that takes you up a one way street the wrong way.. I mean right.. erm.. why are there so many horns tooting outside the car?"

I mean.. I got lost in Aberdeen for pity's sake!