This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Currently trying to sell a car privately and everyone keeps saying that they can test drive because they have fully comprehensive insurance. I was under the impression that the rules have changed (or maybe it's always been the case) but you are now no longer covered third party (by default) if you want to drive another car with the owner's permission and they have fully comprehensive insurance on that car.
Can anyone shed any light on this?
Can anyone shed any light on this?
In reply to Tyler:
Whenever I've looked it up, I find that although I'm fully comp, I can't drive other peoples cars. It's my car that's insured for me to drive.
The owners' car insurance would have to say something like 'and any other driver".
Whenever I've looked it up, I find that although I'm fully comp, I can't drive other peoples cars. It's my car that's insured for me to drive.
The owners' car insurance would have to say something like 'and any other driver".
Post edited at 21:38
In reply to Tyler:
Their insurance will cover them only for the third party liability, not for pranging your car
Their insurance will cover them only for the third party liability, not for pranging your car
In reply to Tyler:
As Woolsack says, they can drive your car and have insurance but it is only third party, if they prang it they can walk away and you have no comeback.
When selling motorbikes test rides are usually only given when the prospective buyer has left the full asking price in cash as a deposit. Count it, seal it in an envelope and you both sign across the seal so you both know it hasn't been tampered with after the test ride.
It sound a lot of hassle but it is the only safe way.
As Woolsack says, they can drive your car and have insurance but it is only third party, if they prang it they can walk away and you have no comeback.
When selling motorbikes test rides are usually only given when the prospective buyer has left the full asking price in cash as a deposit. Count it, seal it in an envelope and you both sign across the seal so you both know it hasn't been tampered with after the test ride.
It sound a lot of hassle but it is the only safe way.
In reply to Tyler:
Funny how lassez faire it is in NZ: here they just throw you the keys any away you go for a spin! I felt strict asking for the other guys keys as security.
But then here insurance is not compulsory, and most policies cover the car for any driver over 25 with a NZ/Oz licence.
Funny how lassez faire it is in NZ: here they just throw you the keys any away you go for a spin! I felt strict asking for the other guys keys as security.
But then here insurance is not compulsory, and most policies cover the car for any driver over 25 with a NZ/Oz licence.
Post edited at 22:05
In reply to Tyler:
Not necessarily! Some of the really cheap insurers (elephant, shielas wheeks... them ones) don't cover you on other vehicles. Aviva and AXA do - my parents are with them.
The policy document/certificate will specifically state whether or not you're covered. Mine specifically says i'm not even though i'm fully comp.
Not necessarily! Some of the really cheap insurers (elephant, shielas wheeks... them ones) don't cover you on other vehicles. Aviva and AXA do - my parents are with them.
The policy document/certificate will specifically state whether or not you're covered. Mine specifically says i'm not even though i'm fully comp.
In reply to Tyler:
You're right, being Fully Comp does not immediately give you Third Party on other peoples vehicles. I think for some insurers it goes on automatically but not until you're 25.
You're right, being Fully Comp does not immediately give you Third Party on other peoples vehicles. I think for some insurers it goes on automatically but not until you're 25.
In reply to damowilk:
Same in Finland - the car is insured not the driver, so anyone is covered to drive it. Makes life very simple although I've never worked out the insurance companies can price in risk in anyway!
Same in Finland - the car is insured not the driver, so anyone is covered to drive it. Makes life very simple although I've never worked out the insurance companies can price in risk in anyway!
In reply to alexcollins123:
Depends on the terms - Elephant, for example, will cover drivers for other people's cars ("The policy holder may drive with the consent of the owner a private motor car not belonging to him/her"), but it's worth checking.
> Some of the really cheap insurers (elephant, shielas wheels... them ones)
> don't cover you on other vehicles
> don't cover you on other vehicles
Depends on the terms - Elephant, for example, will cover drivers for other people's cars ("The policy holder may drive with the consent of the owner a private motor car not belonging to him/her"), but it's worth checking.
In reply to Tyler:
It depends entirely on the policy wording. My insurance definitely covers me on other people's cars with permission. I think it depends on how high risk they see you as to whether they include it or not.
Just ask them to bring their cover note with them so you can check.
Alternatively, get them to insure via one of those insurance by the day websites
It depends entirely on the policy wording. My insurance definitely covers me on other people's cars with permission. I think it depends on how high risk they see you as to whether they include it or not.
Just ask them to bring their cover note with them so you can check.
Alternatively, get them to insure via one of those insurance by the day websites
In reply to alexcollins123:
I have been with Aviva for 2-3 years, I am well over 25, and "third party on any car with owner's permission" became an "extra" a few years ago with them. I pay this extra, it is worth it.
It is no longer the default. A lot of people don't realise this. There is no generalisation.
> Aviva and AXA do - my parents are with them.
I have been with Aviva for 2-3 years, I am well over 25, and "third party on any car with owner's permission" became an "extra" a few years ago with them. I pay this extra, it is worth it.
It is no longer the default. A lot of people don't realise this. There is no generalisation.
Seems to be some misunderstanding of the OP here, despite the OP and thread title being quite clear. Tyler is talking about people who have their own fully comp insurance assuming that this covers them on other cars third-party only. He doesn't need reminding of this. His quite legitimate concern is that even third-party-only cover is not an automatic given. The risks of letting a randommer drive your car with third-party-only insurance are indeed an issue, but a separate one.
In reply to Tyler:
I think mine says I'm third party on any other car.
I've wondered though, and this apply's more to younger drivers, if you could buy a knackered old car for say £200 which is group 1 insurance, get fully comp on that then buy something fast and drive that third party under the group one car's insurance?
I think mine says I'm third party on any other car.
I've wondered though, and this apply's more to younger drivers, if you could buy a knackered old car for say £200 which is group 1 insurance, get fully comp on that then buy something fast and drive that third party under the group one car's insurance?
In reply to Tyler:
Not sure 3rd party cover on other cars was ever provided by default with a fully comp' policy, my understanding is it varies from policy to policy. Mine still have 3rd party cover for cars I don't own.
jk
Not sure 3rd party cover on other cars was ever provided by default with a fully comp' policy, my understanding is it varies from policy to policy. Mine still have 3rd party cover for cars I don't own.
jk
Post edited at 09:03
In reply to TobyA:
Some cars pose higher accident or theft or fire risks and replacement/repair cost vary wildly. Still, I guess the effect is to somewhat flatten insurance prices vs insuring the car-driver combination which has even more potential for high and low risk combinations.
jk
> Same in Finland - the car is insured not the driver, so anyone is covered to drive it. Makes life very simple although I've never worked out the insurance companies can price in risk in anyway!
Some cars pose higher accident or theft or fire risks and replacement/repair cost vary wildly. Still, I guess the effect is to somewhat flatten insurance prices vs insuring the car-driver combination which has even more potential for high and low risk combinations.
jk
In reply to Tyler:
My understanding is that firstly it has to be specified on their policy that they are indeed allowed to drive other cars they aren't named drivers of AND that that car is also currently insured. e.g. I am insured to drive other vehicles (not hire vehicles) as long as that car is insured.
I would be asking to see a copy of thie policy before handing keys over as the police may impound the vehicle which may cost a fair whack not to mention being in trouble for allowing an unisured person to drive your car whether they told you they were or not!
My understanding is that firstly it has to be specified on their policy that they are indeed allowed to drive other cars they aren't named drivers of AND that that car is also currently insured. e.g. I am insured to drive other vehicles (not hire vehicles) as long as that car is insured.
I would be asking to see a copy of thie policy before handing keys over as the police may impound the vehicle which may cost a fair whack not to mention being in trouble for allowing an unisured person to drive your car whether they told you they were or not!
In reply to Tyler:
It depends totally on your insurer. Read your T&Cs and they'll tell you. Mine allows the policy holder (but not the named driver) to drive other cars.
It depends totally on your insurer. Read your T&Cs and they'll tell you. Mine allows the policy holder (but not the named driver) to drive other cars.
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
It is usually a requirement that the other car must also be insured by it's owner.
Insurance companies aren't green enough to fall for scams like this.
> I think mine says I'm third party on any other car.
> I've wondered though, and this apply's more to younger drivers, if you could buy a knackered old car for say £200 which is group 1 insurance, get fully comp on that then buy something fast and drive that third party under the group one car's insurance?
It is usually a requirement that the other car must also be insured by it's owner.
Insurance companies aren't green enough to fall for scams like this.
In reply to Tyler:
Most over 25s have it. It's very unusual for an under 25 to have it, though not completely unknown. But it does as others have said only offer third party cover, i.e. if they crash your car while test driving it it won't pay out for your car, only for the one they crashed into.
But conditions do vary on it.
Neil
Most over 25s have it. It's very unusual for an under 25 to have it, though not completely unknown. But it does as others have said only offer third party cover, i.e. if they crash your car while test driving it it won't pay out for your car, only for the one they crashed into.
But conditions do vary on it.
Neil
Post edited at 09:21
In reply to Tyler:
I don't really care if someone else has third party cover to drive my vehicle - that doesn't help me if they smash it.
Cash in hand is the only way to be sure.
I don't really care if someone else has third party cover to drive my vehicle - that doesn't help me if they smash it.
Cash in hand is the only way to be sure.
In reply to Tyler:
Fully comp does not mean you can drive any other car with 3rd party cover. Usually you have to ask explicitly for this and it should be on your policy doc. Lots of people assume it's part of fully comp and it is not necessarily so. So chances are someone test driving your car is uninsured. Ask to see their policy doc.
Fully comp does not mean you can drive any other car with 3rd party cover. Usually you have to ask explicitly for this and it should be on your policy doc. Lots of people assume it's part of fully comp and it is not necessarily so. So chances are someone test driving your car is uninsured. Ask to see their policy doc.
In reply to Tyler:
I think there is some weird clause for all policies where your car also needs insurance - also their insurance MUST specify they have 3rd party on other cars too. Some fully comp does not.
I think there is some weird clause for all policies where your car also needs insurance - also their insurance MUST specify they have 3rd party on other cars too. Some fully comp does not.
In reply to timjones:
Fair enough.
> It is usually a requirement that the other car must also be insured by it's owner.
> Insurance companies aren't green enough to fall for scams like this.
Fair enough.
In reply to timjones:
I hadn't read your post prior to posting my last one - but yeah I'm pretty sure you are right
> It is usually a requirement that the other car must also be insured by it's owner.
> Insurance companies aren't green enough to fall for scams like this.
I hadn't read your post prior to posting my last one - but yeah I'm pretty sure you are right
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
The other car has to have some kind of insurance associated to it. If your fully comp insurance les you drive other cars third party it will only be valid if that car is also insured by someone else. So basically if a car has no policy attached to it whatsoever no-one can drive it legally on the road
> I think mine says I'm third party on any other car.
> I've wondered though, and this apply's more to younger drivers, if you could buy a knackered old car for say £200 which is group 1 insurance, get fully comp on that then buy something fast and drive that third party under the group one car's insurance?
The other car has to have some kind of insurance associated to it. If your fully comp insurance les you drive other cars third party it will only be valid if that car is also insured by someone else. So basically if a car has no policy attached to it whatsoever no-one can drive it legally on the road
In reply to Tyler:
It's got nothing to do with whether you are fully comp. There will be a separate clause in the insurance document that says something like '3rd party only on any car with owner's permission'
My first insurance policy was 3rd party fire & theft but I still had the 3rd party only clause for other cars.
It's got nothing to do with whether you are fully comp. There will be a separate clause in the insurance document that says something like '3rd party only on any car with owner's permission'
My first insurance policy was 3rd party fire & theft but I still had the 3rd party only clause for other cars.
In reply to Tyler:
It wouldn't be their insurance that covered them but it could be yours, but anyway I would advise against letting them go for a test run, take them yourself if they want but that's all. Quiet apart from the possibility of them just going off with the car - rare but it does happen - the complications if they had an accident could be a real pain. Garages often do it but you are not a garage
It wouldn't be their insurance that covered them but it could be yours, but anyway I would advise against letting them go for a test run, take them yourself if they want but that's all. Quiet apart from the possibility of them just going off with the car - rare but it does happen - the complications if they had an accident could be a real pain. Garages often do it but you are not a garage
Post edited at 13:25
In reply to CurlyStevo:
Part of the reason for it is also that once the person driving under the third party extension walks away from the car (and as such are no longer "driving" it), it is then an uninsured car on the public road if there isn't a normal policy on it. Which would of course be a problem.
That said, the new compulsory insurance rules (you must have insurance on a car unless SORNed) means that is less likely anyway so the condition is a bit spurious and might well disappear.
Neil
Part of the reason for it is also that once the person driving under the third party extension walks away from the car (and as such are no longer "driving" it), it is then an uninsured car on the public road if there isn't a normal policy on it. Which would of course be a problem.
That said, the new compulsory insurance rules (you must have insurance on a car unless SORNed) means that is less likely anyway so the condition is a bit spurious and might well disappear.
Neil
Post edited at 13:54
In reply to PeterM:
"Usually you have to ask explicitly for this"
Aged over 25 you get it by default with any insurer I've ever been with. Up to 25 you'd have to request it and would likely get hit with a hefty extra premium if they did allow it.
"it should be on your policy doc"
Indeed, it'll be on the certificate, the schedule or both if you have it.
Neil
"Usually you have to ask explicitly for this"
Aged over 25 you get it by default with any insurer I've ever been with. Up to 25 you'd have to request it and would likely get hit with a hefty extra premium if they did allow it.
"it should be on your policy doc"
Indeed, it'll be on the certificate, the schedule or both if you have it.
Neil
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
"It wouldn't be their insurance that covered them"
Erm, yes it would, as per the rest of the thread.
Neil
"It wouldn't be their insurance that covered them"
Erm, yes it would, as per the rest of the thread.
Neil
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
For the most part this is incorrect for personal motor insurance. It's their insurance that covers them (3rd party only I'm afraid) but the car must also be insured.
That's because the insurance traders and garages have allows them to do this!
> It wouldn't be their insurance that covered them but it could be yours
For the most part this is incorrect for personal motor insurance. It's their insurance that covers them (3rd party only I'm afraid) but the car must also be insured.
> Garages often do it but you are not a garage
That's because the insurance traders and garages have allows them to do this!
In reply to doz generale:
That's not actually stipulated on mine or wasn't last time a checked a few years back but it is unusual in that respect.
jk
> The other car has to have some kind of insurance associated to it. If your fully comp insurance les you drive other cars third party it will only be valid if that car is also insured by someone else. So basically if a car has no policy attached to it whatsoever no-one can drive it legally on the road
That's not actually stipulated on mine or wasn't last time a checked a few years back but it is unusual in that respect.
jk
In reply to JoshOvki:
I don't think its grey... every policy I have had in 24 years whether 3d party or comp has stated either nothing or (more usually) that I can drive other cars not owned by me that are not hire cars on a 3d party basis.
The only bit that isn't spelt out but which seems pretty obvious and well known is that it is not legal to drive a car or have it on public land unless it has its own policy attached to it. So that means that when driving a veicle using teh 'not owned by me 3d party basis' that vehicle still needs to have a valid policy on it as well.
So - one always has a policy that either is silent on the matter (you can't) or pretty clearly states that you can.... and the vehicle in question will have its own policy that covers its owners and drivers and covers it for use on an open road.
For the OP - if willing to accept risk of a 3d party crashing your car simply ask to see their policy and if it says they can do it and your car still has a policy on it, allow them to test drive with you in the passanger seat and the keys only handed to them when you are both in the car and handed back to you at end of th edrive before you get out! If not willing to take risk on them crashing your car the only route to go down is either you test drive with them in passanger seat or they produce a cover note from a day insurance place for the car on the correct day. Or you do that together on-line in your house before going out for a drive (hopefully at their expense). If somebody is serious a viewing, you doing a drive to show that car is OK and makes no nasty noises and then them arranging cover so they can drive would be reasonable.
I don't think its grey... every policy I have had in 24 years whether 3d party or comp has stated either nothing or (more usually) that I can drive other cars not owned by me that are not hire cars on a 3d party basis.
The only bit that isn't spelt out but which seems pretty obvious and well known is that it is not legal to drive a car or have it on public land unless it has its own policy attached to it. So that means that when driving a veicle using teh 'not owned by me 3d party basis' that vehicle still needs to have a valid policy on it as well.
So - one always has a policy that either is silent on the matter (you can't) or pretty clearly states that you can.... and the vehicle in question will have its own policy that covers its owners and drivers and covers it for use on an open road.
For the OP - if willing to accept risk of a 3d party crashing your car simply ask to see their policy and if it says they can do it and your car still has a policy on it, allow them to test drive with you in the passanger seat and the keys only handed to them when you are both in the car and handed back to you at end of th edrive before you get out! If not willing to take risk on them crashing your car the only route to go down is either you test drive with them in passanger seat or they produce a cover note from a day insurance place for the car on the correct day. Or you do that together on-line in your house before going out for a drive (hopefully at their expense). If somebody is serious a viewing, you doing a drive to show that car is OK and makes no nasty noises and then them arranging cover so they can drive would be reasonable.
In reply to CurlyStevo:
Cheers. Pretty sure mine just said 'any other car not owned by the policy holder' last time I looked but that was some time ago and it may have been tidied up in the intervening years. I look into it when moving some rally cars around on the IoM, they only tend to be insured on a per event basis.
jk
Cheers. Pretty sure mine just said 'any other car not owned by the policy holder' last time I looked but that was some time ago and it may have been tidied up in the intervening years. I look into it when moving some rally cars around on the IoM, they only tend to be insured on a per event basis.
jk
In reply to Tyler:
Mine is clear as day!! (new policy last week and didn't ask for it)
"The Policyholder may also drive a private motor car not belonging to the Policyholder and not hired to the Policyholder under a Hire Purchase Agreement or leased, provided it is insured under another insurance policy, for social domestic and pleasure use only and with the consent of the owner. Cover is limited to Third Party Only"
Mine is clear as day!! (new policy last week and didn't ask for it)
"The Policyholder may also drive a private motor car not belonging to the Policyholder and not hired to the Policyholder under a Hire Purchase Agreement or leased, provided it is insured under another insurance policy, for social domestic and pleasure use only and with the consent of the owner. Cover is limited to Third Party Only"
In reply to Tyler:
Not sure if I'm reading your OP correctly but if I am, I think you're under the false impression that it's *your* insurance they'd be covered by. In reality, it's *their* policy which (may) allow them to drive any other car with the owner's permission, and in that case, it'd be 3rd party cover.
Not sure if I'm reading your OP correctly but if I am, I think you're under the false impression that it's *your* insurance they'd be covered by. In reality, it's *their* policy which (may) allow them to drive any other car with the owner's permission, and in that case, it'd be 3rd party cover.
In reply to Neil Williams and Curly:
Ok, maybe insurance policies have changed since I last read one but either way we all seem agreed that it would be "third party cover only" so where does that leave the seller if the potential buyer has a crash? I'd say scuppered!
I've sold loads of vehicles and I've never let the buyer go for a test run driving it themselves... none have ever asked either, just hearing the motor running has always been enough. Each to his own though.
Ok, maybe insurance policies have changed since I last read one but either way we all seem agreed that it would be "third party cover only" so where does that leave the seller if the potential buyer has a crash? I'd say scuppered!
I've sold loads of vehicles and I've never let the buyer go for a test run driving it themselves... none have ever asked either, just hearing the motor running has always been enough. Each to his own though.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...