gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/uninsured-vehicles
maybe its the way its written then
dieseldog999:
+1 correct… if it says any car other than 1 hired to you etc,then your covered as far as plod etc goes…moreso if you have a trade policy…mine just says,any car belonging to me,or in my custody or control ,hence I can be legal in anything.cost me £600 but its worth it if you have a few toys ,campervans etc. part time trader,no premises,no public liability etc…hppy days all round,and 100% legal
Can you give more details on this policy?
And, how does it work for vehicles parked on public highway etc?
nick2008:
Vehicle insurance: Uninsured vehicles - GOV.UK
maybe its the way its written then
As I keep stating, the Continuous Insurance law and / or sorn apply to the registered keeper, if I borrowed a friends car that held no insurance (My own insurance does not require the other car to hold it’s own Insurance) then I would be Insured by my Direct Line policy so I would not be committing an offence. The registered keeper would be the one who would receive a relatively small fine under Sorn or Conituous Insurance Law. The registered keeper would not be aiding or abetting no insurance as I hold relevant insurance under the RTA covering me to drive their car.
Here is the relevant part of the Direct Line Policy.
1b. Driving other cars
"If your certificate of motor insurance says so, this policy provides the
same cover as above in 1a when you are driving any other motor
car as long as you do not own it and it is not hired to you under a hire
purchase or leasing agreement. This cover only applies if:
there is no other insurance in force which covers the same liability;
- you have the owner’s permission to drive the car;
- the car is registered in and being driven in Great Britain, Northern Ireland,
the Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands; and - you still have your car and it has not been damaged beyond
cost-effective repair.
Note — There is no cover under clause 1b for damage, fire or theft to
the car you are driving"
directline.com/content/dam/ … ■■■■■■■■■■ (page 12)
Note the difference between the above DL Policy which does not mention the car needs it’s own Insurance and Esure’s Policy which specifically requires the car to hold it’s own insurance
"1b. Driving other cars
If your Schedule says so, your policy provides the same cover as section 1a (above) when you are driving
any other car as long as it is not a car either owned by you or your partner or hired or leased to you or
your partner under a hire purchase or leasing agreement or hired or rented to you or your partner under
a car hire or rental agreement. This cover only applies if:
- the car has been manufactured for the carriage of up to, but not more than, eight people which is
designed solely for private use and has not been designed, constructed or modified to carry goods - there is no other insurance in force which covers the same claim
- you have the owner’s permission to drive the car
- the car is insured by the owner
- the car is being driven in the UK, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands
- you still have your car and it has not been sold, written off or damaged beyond cost-effective repair.
We do not cover loss of, or damage to, any other car you drive.
This extension does not apply if you do not have a valid UK driving licence or are breaking the conditions
of your UK driving licence.
The driving other cars extension cannot be used to secure the release of a motor vehicle which has been
seized by, or on behalf of, any government or public authority"
esure.com/wcm/groups/public/ … ooklet.pdf (Page 12)
Just to reiterate again, offences under the Continuous Insurance and SORN are committed by the registered keeper, they’re not committed by the driver unless they’re also the registered keeper.
waynedl:
dieseldog999:
+1 correct… if it says any car other than 1 hired to you etc,then your covered as far as plod etc goes…moreso if you have a trade policy…mine just says,any car belonging to me,or in my custody or control ,hence I can be legal in anything.cost me £600 but its worth it if you have a few toys ,campervans etc. part time trader,no premises,no public liability etc…hppy days all round,and 100% legalCan you give more details on this policy?
And, how does it work for vehicles parked on public highway etc?
It’s a motor trade policy for people who are part time or full time in the motor trade industry probably with a krap Insurer such as Tradex or Covea. It covers you for your own cars and cars in your custody for your motor trade business with restrctions on what vehicles they will cover and has restrictions on certain vehicles or types of vehicles which may be restricted to third party only cover etc.
The drawbacks of these types of policies are they tend to be offered by the really poor end of the market so the claims service is really poor. In addition when you report a claim they will normally require you to provide documentary proof you are a genuine motor trade. This could be your accounts, adverts or purchase / sales invoices. If you don’t can’t supply these to their satisfaction they will normally decline the claim and void the policy.
You also have be careful in that they apply the use restrictions very strictly in that you’re covered to drive your own vehicles for private use and your motortrade use, you’re also covered for vehicles in your custody or control for the purposes of YOUR motor trade business for private and motor trade use. If you have a claim in a car not belonging to you they will thoroughly check that you were using it in connection with your motor trade use eg a test drive etc. It does not cover you to borrow your friend’s or employers vehicles unless it’s being you have it as part of your motor trade business. So you would have to say you were performing a test drive etc, I’ve seen a fair few people be caught out by this as they think they’re covered for their friends cars for any use. Traffic Police will go out of their way to question MT drivers to ensure they driving exactly as their policy covers them, so they ask specific questions to try and catch out the unwary.
Write off claims are settled at the “Trade value” and not the “market value” as you would receive on a normal motor policy.
Your obliged (Under these types of policies) to update the Insurers with vehicles that will be in your possession for more than seven days to be updated onto the MID database (The one the Police and DVLA use to verify insurance is in place), if you don’t do this you run the risk of a fine as well as the vehicle not being covered by your Insurer.
The Policy will cover an otherwise uninsured vehicle parked on the road (Subject to you updating the MID), the only problem you have is the recent changes to the Road Tax in that the Road Tax finishes when you sell the car. So when you buy a car as a trader there will be no tax on the car unless you go and buy Road Tax or you use Trade Plates. It should be noted that trade plates can’t be left on your parked vehicle on the road at night.
Please don’t buy a motor trade policy unless you’re a genuine trader, I’ve seen literally dozens of people caught out by them when the policy does not cover them as they could not prove they’re actually involved in the motortrade or are caught out by the use. As I stated the Police are strict on these types of policies and the Insurers involved are even more strict in ensuring your entitled to the claim as they get so many chancers. You tend to only get found out when you’re either stopped or involved in an accident
I would call direct line and ask them as I just did - no chance of being covered by them if the vehicle is not already insured!
Want that in writing then email them
ROG:
I would call direct line and ask them as I just did - no chance of being covered by them if the vehicle is not already insured!Want that in writing then email them
No disrespect but I worked in Insurance for many years and understand it very very well. I’m a well respected poster giving advice on insurance on numerous forums.
A policy is in effect a contract, if it does not state that the other car needs to be insured then it does not need to be insured, that’s simple contract law. If you also throw in that the Insurer is also bound by I.C.O.Bs (The FCA’s requirements on Insurers) and also the Ombudsman as well as the Unfair Contract Laws (They also have statutory duties under the Road Traffic Act when there’s a certificate of insurance in place stating you’re covered for driving other cars). There is zero chance of an Insurer who does not specify the other car needs to be insured under DOCs not paying out under driving other cars.
Incidently the majority of staff you would speak to at an Insurer have a very limited understanding of Insurance and even when no Insurers stipulated the other car needed it’s own insurance they would routinely tell you that it needed it’s own insurance as they would either guess or believe the old urban myth about it. You could ring up Insurers and ask them if your car insurance is still valid without an MOT and I guarantee 95% of them would tell you it was invalid when in reality not having an MOT cannot (On it’s own) invalidate your Insurance under any circumstances irrespective of whether the policy stipulated it or not.
Try ringing Direct Line up and asking if not having an MOT invalidates your Insurance and see what they say, while your on the phone ask them to point out to your where in their policy it stipulates the other car under DOC needs it’s own Insurance. When they can’t point this out to you ask them how they will enforce this. When you ask them to point it out to you they will place you on hold while they speak to a slightly more senior member of staff. They’ll eventually come back to you and either tell you it does not need it’s own insurance or they will try and blag you. When they try and blag you pull them up on it by asking how they will enforce and they will just try and BS you.
Try asking about the lack of MOT, 70% of call centre staff will tell you the policy will be invalidated by not having one, if they do come back to me and I’ll happily post two separate (Insurance) regulatory authorities that state this is wrong.
ROG:
I would call direct line and ask them as I just did - no chance of being covered by them if the vehicle is not already insured!Want that in writing then email them
I’ve just had an online chat with Directline asking this question. The DL representative told me the car needed it’s own cover which I politely stated was incorrect. They have then tried telling me the SORN and continuous insurance rules prevent it being covered by their policy which I have again pointed out is incorrect. They then tried stating the car would not legally be on the road if it falls foul of SORN and continuous insurance laws and as such the policy would not be covered. I’ve pointed this is not correct for a number of reasons and they then referred the matter to a senior member of their underwriting team who confirmed that I was right and under the DL policy that under driving other cars the other car does not need to hold it’s own cover.
They did add the caveat that if you park the car up on the side of the road it then holds no insurance as it’s only covered whilst being driven.
Incidently this is arguably wrong as there are times when the cover would still apply if say you popped into a shop or garage during an overall journey as the higher courts tend to look at an overall journey eg if you’re on your way to a prebooked MOT you are permitted to stop at a garage or shop and are not committing an offence of not having an MOT as it’s seen as a part of an overall journey.
The events happened much as I described in my post above eg they make a guess at the right answer being the car needs it’s own insurance and then try to blag you. When they refer the matter to someone who actually knows their policy they confirm that under the DL policy the other car does not need to hold it’s own Insurance. It’s fairly typical with frontline Insurance staff to not totally understand their own policy and to either guess the answer or use urban myths to answer it.
I’ll happily post a transcript of the online conversation if you require proof.
We have a pool car, you ‘may’ be recovered if you have spread time left but they will categorically NOT recover you if you’re out of duty time.
We are told you can be recovered by a member of your family or ‘friend’ (it is printed like that) which I guess could mean if your ‘friend’ comes and gets you in the pool car all is well 
NewLad:
We have a pool car, you ‘may’ be recovered if you have spread time left but they will categorically NOT recover you if you’re out of duty time.We are told you can be recovered by a member of your family or ‘friend’ (it is printed like that) which I guess could mean if your ‘friend’ comes and gets you in the pool car all is well
The same rules apply whether workmate or family friend
Left hand down!:
Personally if I was out of time and didn’t do nights out I wouldn’t give a flying [zb] what insurance was or wasn’t in place on the ‘recovery’ vehicle so long as they got me home. Too many big girls blouses in this industry now flapping over the slightest non-events instead of just cracking on and getting the job done.
Yep me too on this. Unfortunately for dozy he is the one taking all the risks as he is using his private car for business use.
I would have thought Stobbies would have a pool car he could use for this, but I get the feeling he dropped his ■■■■■■■ and off his own bat went off in his own car hoping this would curry him favour, he has a lot to learn. Hopefully now he is a little wiser.
Blimey dozy get a grip, if a company wants you to use a car, you use a company car, not your own.
Did you charge them for the fuel used recovering the driver.
Trust me dozy you will come unstuck ‘getting the job done’, covering your own arse is rule 1.
I do like your posts though so please don’t read this as a dig of anykind…
Dipper_Dave:
Left hand down!:
Personally if I was out of time and didn’t do nights out I wouldn’t give a flying [zb] what insurance was or wasn’t in place on the ‘recovery’ vehicle so long as they got me home. Too many big girls blouses in this industry now flapping over the slightest non-events instead of just cracking on and getting the job done.Yep me too on this. Unfortunately for dozy he is the one taking all the risks as he is using his private car for business use.
I would have thought Stobbies would have a pool car he could use for this, but I get the feeling he dropped his ■■■■■■■ and off his own bat went off in his own car hoping this would curry him favour, he has a lot to learn. Hopefully now he is a little wiser.
Blimey dozy get a grip, if a company wants you to use a car, you use a company car, not your own.
Did you charge them for the fuel used recovering the driver.Trust me dozy you will come unstuck ‘getting the job done’, covering your own arse is rule 1.
I do like your posts though so please don’t read this as a dig of anykind…
I think it’s perhaps a little unfair to berate him in these circumstances. He did state that he went to recover a mate that had run out of time. Yes, sure, use a company pool car/van if one is available, but faced with the same situation I would’ve probably done the same as him and used my own car if my mate wasn’t too far away; it’s what you do for mates when they’re in the ■■■■. As for the topic of payment for doing this whilst still in work time, well let’s just say that they is more than one way of skinning a cat.
what’s all the fuss…he was doing a mate a favour…
ROG:
A driver cannot start a rest at point (A) away from base/home then finish the rest at point (B) - the driver must end the rest back at point (A)Lets say the driver is based at Leicester and needs to start a rest at Coventry … the records must show the end of the rest finished at Coventry - what the driver did on their own time during the rest is up to them so they could have their mate come and pick them up from Coventry take them to Leicester and then drop them back to Coventry to restart
What the driver cannot do is to show a gap in the journey records from Coventry to Leicester so starting a rest in Coventry and ending the rest in Leicester is illegal
We’ve been round this particular block before, haven’t we? Where is it stated that a Rest period away from home has to start and finish at the same location?
Roymondo:
ROG:
A driver cannot start a rest at point (A) away from base/home then finish the rest at point (B) - the driver must end the rest back at point (A)Lets say the driver is based at Leicester and needs to start a rest at Coventry … the records must show the end of the rest finished at Coventry - what the driver did on their own time during the rest is up to them so they could have their mate come and pick them up from Coventry take them to Leicester and then drop them back to Coventry to restart
What the driver cannot do is to show a gap in the journey records from Coventry to Leicester so starting a rest in Coventry and ending the rest in Leicester is illegal
We’ve been round this particular block before, haven’t we? Where is it stated that a Rest period away from home has to start and finish at the same location?
so when like I was stranded because a guy had jumped off a bridge and I ran over the body. the police seized the truck etc I made my own way back to depot , where do I start my next working shift … the same could be said for a driver that’s taken ill on the road and rushed to hospital , answers on a postcard .
nick2008:
so when like I was stranded because a guy had jumped off a bridge and I ran over the body. the police seized the truck etc I made my own way back to depot , where do I start my next working shift … the same could be said for a driver that’s taken ill on the road and rushed to hospital , answers on a postcard .
Roymondo:
We’ve been round this particular block before, haven’t we? Where is it stated that a Rest period away from home has to start and finish at the same location?
It isn’t stated anywhere.
However if you finish away from base and start next shift back at base, or vice versa, then the travelling time from finish place to start place will be other work for the regulations.
If you have no working time left in the shift you will have to either start the next shift at the same place or use the first part of the shift after your rest period as the travelling time.
ROG:
A driver cannot start a rest at point (A) away from base/home then finish the rest at point (B) - the driver must end the rest back at point (A)
Rubbish
ROG:
What the driver cannot do is to show a gap in the journey records from Coventry to Leicester so starting a rest in Coventry and ending the rest in Leicester is illegal
There are ways to make it legal so to say otherwise is nonsense.
Coffeeholic:
Roymondo:
We’ve been round this particular block before, haven’t we? Where is it stated that a Rest period away from home has to start and finish at the same location?It isn’t stated anywhere.
However if you finish away from base and start next shift back at base, or vice versa, then the travelling time from finish place to start place will be other work for the regulations.
If you have no working time left in the shift you will have to either start the next shift at the same place or use the first part of the shift after your rest period as the travelling time.
Where is that stated?
What if I was an agency driver and took a one-way assignment on a Monday to drive a truck from Birmingham to Benidorm, then spent the next few days on R&R bimbling around Spain and Southern France with my mate in his camper van, before flying to the US for a family wedding and then back to UK before starting my next job in Edinburgh. Which part of that journey is going to be counted as traveling time (i.e. Other Work) for the regulations?
Roymondo:
Coffeeholic:
Roymondo:
We’ve been round this particular block before, haven’t we? Where is it stated that a Rest period away from home has to start and finish at the same location?It isn’t stated anywhere.
However if you finish away from base and start next shift back at base, or vice versa, then the travelling time from finish place to start place will be other work for the regulations.
If you have no working time left in the shift you will have to either start the next shift at the same place or use the first part of the shift after your rest period as the travelling time.
Where is that stated?
EC 561/2006 Article 9 (2)
Any time spent travelling to a location to take charge of a vehicle falling within the scope of this Regulation, or to return from that location, when the vehicle is neither at the driver’s home nor at the employer’s operational centre where the driver is normally based, shall not be counted as a rest or break unless the driver is on a ferry or train and has access to a bunk or couchette.
Roymondo:
What if I was an agency driver and took a one-way assignment on a Monday to drive a truck from Birmingham to Benidorm, then spent the next few days on R&R bimbling around Spain and Southern France with my mate in his camper van, before flying to the US for a family wedding and then back to UK before starting my next job in Edinburgh. Which part of that journey is going to be counted as traveling time (i.e. Other Work) for the regulations?
No idea. 