Yes, 3Ts is quite correct.
Many drivers seem to adopt a somewhat cavalier attitude to insurance in some respects. This restriction has been imposed by most major insurers for a number of years and to plead ignorance of it simply demonstrates my point. I’ve just done a dummy quote on “comparethemarket.com”. Question 1 concerns the details of the vehicle. Question 2 is about the vehicle’s usage. There are three options: (a) Social, Domestic and Pleasure; (2) Social, Domestic, Pleasure and Commuting; (3) Social, Domestic, Pleasure and Business. Option (2) is described as “This is the above [SDP] but also includes commuting to and from your single permanent place of work”.
There is no excuse for either (a) not realising there is a difference or (b) realising it but breaking the conditions. To do so means you are driving uninsured. The consequences (for others) of you doing so can be disastrous so the police are quite right to do all they can to prevent uninsured driving. There is nothing “heavy handed” about it. A driver is either insured or he is not and to detect a driver using his vehicle beyond the scope of his policy is just as important as detecting one with no policy at all.