driving an uninsured car on another policy

[dooda]

can i drive someone else's car which is currently not insured, on my comp insurnce? as it needs to be mot'd

[themas]

It depends on what your insurance policy says. A lot of them allow this (but it is probably limited to third party cover) with the consent of the car's owner. But check your policy wording and schedule carefully, and speak to your insurer if you are not absolutely certain, before driving it.

[dooda]

I don't think the person on yhe other end of the phone really understood the question, but the answer was no.

Thanks themas

[gouldc]

To use DOC (driving other cars) on your policy (where applicable), the other vehicle MUST be insured elsewhere and not be owned (or at least registered) to you.

[New Judge]

And also beware that cars which are kept on the road now have to be continuously insured. Even if they are not driven it is an offence to keep a vehicle on a road or other public place without there being Third Party insurance in effect.

[kempie]

gouldc - Any claims whilst driving under DOC (and I am aware that coverage is limited to driving - perhaps in emergency only - and not whilst parked etc.) can only be made under the DOC policy. Therefore, why MUST a second policy that will never be used for claim purposes exist?

What of this current anomaly whereby the "other car" is temporarily stored off-road, is still taxed, and is legitimately driven using a DOC clause?

I am aware that Section 22 of the Road Safety Act 2006 has provisions that stipulate changes to the Road Traffic Act in the requirements for insurance coverage of vehicles "kept or used in a public place" but since this has not yet been commenced and as such is not "in law", it is currently the decision of individual insurers whether they make this (future) requirement a condition of the policy. In this case surely it is inaccurate to say "MUST be insured elsewhere" when an insurer may choose not to include that condition.

BTW I am not advocating cars being driven wholesale on a DOC clause.

Also, I believe the increased Police powers to crackdown on "uninsured" vehicles is actually nonsensical without S.22 RSA 2006 being active, leading to numerous cases of vehicles being siezed which are covered (indirectly, and therefore not visible on the MID) by a policy of insurance. Perhaps I should petition No 10 to implement this necessary piece of legislation; Heaven only knows why in the last 12 months or so it hasn't been implemented.

[Ethel]

I agree with everything you say, except the last paragraph.

It would be impossible for a vehicle to be seized for no insurance if being used properly under DOC - it must be being driven to be legal, and the driver will be given a HORT/1.

Provided he can produce the insurance document there would be no seizure. If the same driver parked the vehicle and left it, then it would be legitimately seized as it is not being driven and has no insurance.

[kempie]

When Police stop a vehicle for suspected insurance violation, such as during the various crackdown operations reported over the previous few years, they often do so based on the vehicle registration not being held on the Motor Insurance Database (MID). If the stopped driver cannot immediately prove valid insurance cover i.e. via mobile phonecall (or equivalent) to the Insurance Provider, the vehicle will be seized. A HO/RT1 is not issued in this particular case since the Police consider the vehicle to not have insurance based on the evidence of the MID.

Cases of wrongfully seized cars (not neccessarily DOC)...

http://www.newswales.co.uk/?section=Community& F=1&id=11729

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/ 1007/1007863_cops_seized_my_insured_car.html

[kempie]

S152 Serious Organised Crime & Police Act 2005

With the commencement of that part of the Serious Organised Crime & Police Act 2005 constables in uniform now have the power to seize uninsured motor vehicles and vehicles driven without a licence provided the conditions stated in that section are satisfied.

If a driver is stopped under suspicion of driving without insurance (e.g. registration not on MID) and does not immediately produce evidence to the contrary, a constable is directed under current ACPO guidelines to encourage the driver to remove and retain personal property from the vehicle prior to removal and issue a seizure notice (and HO/RT/1 where appropriate).

http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/gu ide_seizure_retention_disposal_unisured_vehs_w ebsite.doc

The driver will at this stage be left to find their own way home and the RK (if not the driver) instantly liable for the �105 removal fee and �12 storage fee for the first 24 hours or part thereof.

This can lawfully happen to a motorist lawfully driving a vehicle because S22 RSA 2006 has not yet received a Commencement Order. Ridiculous!