Am i covered to drive a car third party, as the reg-keeper

[apollo-8]

I need to know....
I own,drive, am the reg-keeper and am insured fully-comp for my car.
Now the tricky bit..My girl-friend and i, decided to swap cars,mine for her's,she made me the Reg-keeper of her car.She was still insured for it as an 'Only driver'.It got left at that for time-being.I needed to pick something up,so i borrowed her's, with her consent. I was stopped by the police, for 'no seat belt' ok.... And now no insurance !, even though mine enabled me to drive another vehicle '3rd Party' .I was the reg-keeper but it wasn't my car, was i covered to drive a car third party, as reg-keeper only..

[dzug2]

The answer will depend on the exact wording of your own policy.

If yes you still have the problem of proving to the police or a court that you as the registered keeper are not the owner.

[apollo-8]

on my g-friends policy it states she is the owner, i can drive any vehicle so long as it doesn't belong to me, as a third party driver. As it states on the log book does not prove ownership of vehicle only keeper, I was insured and she was, so i should be covered,it's just the reg-keeper and owner bit

[calamityjane67]

I always thought that if you are fully comp and you hve the owners permission to drive the car , then you are covered for 3rd party.

[flip_flop]

The police, at best, have a pretty loose understanding of these issues.

If you have a driving other cars extension on your policy - evidenced by your certificate of insurance - and you had the owners permission to drive their car, then your policy will provide Third Party Only cover whilst you drive the other car.

The car can be registered in the name of Mickey Mouse - it makes not a jot of difference - although you'll need to provide some evidence (purchase receipt for example) that it isn't your car.

[R1Geezer]

No calamity, that is a myth, you are only covered if it says you are covered.

As you are the registered keeper then you are not covered by the clause that says you can drive third party any car not belonging to you for hire or reward etc etc. The only way to avoid a no insurance prosecution here is if you can show that although you are the keeper you are not the owner but that looks tricky as you have actually swapped cars. I assumed when you say you borrowed hers you mean what was originally hers and now yours.

[New Judge]

The usual wording for policies that extend cover to other cars is “...may drive vehicles not owned by the policyholder and not hired to him under a hire purchase agreement”.

As has been pointed out, the difficulty you will have is proving that you did not own this car. If the police do not believe that you are not the owner they will probably offer you a fixed penalty (£200 fine and 6 points). If you want to deny the charge you must reject this offer and opt for a court hearing where you must plead Not Guilty.

You will have to repudiate the contention that you owned the car. You may have to call your girlfriend as a witness. One supporting fact is that she should be able to show that she retained the insurance policy which, presumably, she took out as the owner. You may do well to seek the advice of a solicitor.

[apollo-8]

No she was still the policy holder for the vehicle, so it is an insured vehicle. she registered it in my name,( on the log book ) ,the car was not used much, I was insured only for my own car, fully comp.I drove her;s presuming i was covered.i was stopped.The car impounded. Only my g-friend could get it released with her insurance and drivers licence. My insurance covers me to drive another car, so long as i am not the owner..I was told i wasn't covered to drive two car's on one insurance policy ????

[apollo-8]

Thank you new judge, yes i am at court and have pleaded not guilty.I did not have an option to show my insurance,at the station etc..if it had not been reg to me it would of been straight cut...As it states on the log book not proof of ownership...

[woozer]

Ask your insurer to provide a written statement confirming that they were covering you for the minimum required under the RTA - this may help to show you were driving legally. However, you could find that even if your certificate says you are insured to drive other cars not belonging to you etc there may be exclusions in the policy itself which qualify this. For example the policy itself may state that the Driving Other cars Extension shall not provide cover to members of the policyholders family or household.
You should also bear in mind that it is the intention of this extension to provide cover in an emergency e.g. the driver becoming too ill to drive and you having to take over on a journey.
When you decided to swap cars you should also have advised the relevant insurer of the change of main driver.

[apollo-8]

Today, it was the court case...for the above...insurance offence dropped..,no proof on ownership...i was insured...for the seat belt and no mot...fined £215.....