| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2427.1 | A bit dodgy? | WOTVAX::HARDYP | | Wed Jul 05 1995 22:11 | 14 |
| If it could be taken that you are doing this to avoid paying a higher
premium then you could be in trouble, as could the owner.
Is the car insured in someone else's name? If not you've probably got
real problems.
In all cases for insurance, you must tell your insurer of any
information that may be relevent to the contract. Being the keeper
sounds relevent to me.
But then this is only an opinion, totally uncorrupted by supporting
evidence.
Peter
|
| 2427.2 | Two policies needed. | CMOTEC::JASPER | Stuck on the Flypaper of Life | Thu Jul 06 1995 12:48 | 13 |
| I understand it this way:
Provided the vehicle owner taxes, insures & maintains the vehicle, then
you with your "May drive another vehicle etc" clause in your own
separate policy will then legally satisfy the insurance criterion
of having minimum insurance. Two Insurance policies must be in effect,
one for the vehicle not covering your use & your own for a different
vehicle enabling driving of other cars.
Tony.
|
| 2427.3 | The vehicle does not have have to be insuresd... | IOSG::MITCHELLE | Pigs all fed and watered, and ready to fly | Thu Jul 06 1995 13:24 | 11 |
|
I don't think the vehicle has to have any other insurance policy associated
with it. A few years ago a friend asked me to take their car between two storage
places - as he had no insurance policies at all - and when I asked the Police
about this they said I was within the law to drive it - third party only, if
my own insurance policy allowed it. If it had been stolen while I was in charge
if it - then it was my friend's problem, but if I had parked it somewhere and it
ran down the hill and damaged something, then the third party damage would have
been covered - so they told me, but I wouldn't really like to try to argue it
out.....
|
| 2427.4 | I stick by .1 | CMOTEC::JASPER | Stuck on the Flypaper of Life | Thu Jul 06 1995 19:03 | 4 |
| Dont rely on the police to interpret the law correctly, or to
understand the finer points of insurance which you are asking :-).
Tony.
|
| 2427.5 | fI asked the brokers.... | IOSG::MITCHELLE | Pigs all fed and watered, and ready to fly | Thu Jul 13 1995 17:42 | 18 |
| I decided to try to find out about this - so I 'phoned my broker. The first
answer they gave me was that the other vehicle did not have to be separately
insured, but then they said they would check for me. This then gave the answer
that all was ok _while_ I was driving, but if I parked eg in town to do the
shopping, then the vehicle was "on the public highway uninsured", so the owner
could be prosecuted - therefor other insurance was required. I then pointed out
what the Police had told me, and they then said that the legality of whether the
car was insured or not was up to the interpretation of the Police. (Is a town
council car park classed as public highway? - I didn't dare ask!!!)
(I decided not to complecate the issue by asking about owner/keeper
possibilities! The above seemed a little much for them to comprehend :-) )
Perhaps the only way to sort out this one is to speak to Norwich Union
themselves - anyone got their 'phone number ? :-)
(This is all academic now anyway - the vehicle in question has been insured in
its own right - I'd just like to know....)
|