Companies can own a car, but they company is not insured on it, a specific person often is.
Ownership does not mean you have to use the object, I own some laptop RAM, but I've never used it, my parents are using it.
Insurance through DOC
- Thread starter therealnerd2
- Start date
Companies can own a car, but they company is not insured on it, a specific person often is.
Ownership does not mean you have to use the object, I own some laptop RAM, but I've never used it, my parents are using it.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
No insurance company with half a brain is going to beleive that she is the legitimate owner of a car which:
a) You used to own and were driving under DOC at the time a claim
b) That she isn't legally insured to drive herself
c) That she never drives and is outside the typical vehicle type for her demographic
etc etc.
The loss investigation team would be all over your claim like a rash.
You know as well as we do its your car - you are just trying to find a way around having to insure it like everyone else does.
Fraud = obtaining funds by deception. In this case, the funds are the money you'd have to spend on insurance and the deception is the charade that its owned by your girlfriend, when in reality, we all know it isn't.
JUST INSURE IT PROPERLY
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
[TW]Fox;15806233 said:
It's not fraud. If he gives the car to his GF then legally there's no issue. Whether she drives it or has her own insurance is totally irrelevant.
I agree with the sentiment, but there's nothing 'wrong' per se with what he is doing, whether we like it or not.
He isnt really giving it to her, is he? He's pretending she owns it so that he can drive it without obtaining insurance. She wont drive it, has no interest in it, etc.
Is there any major price difference between fidling an insurance policy so it looks like she owns it and your not menioned, or just insuring it in your own name?
Also, DOC is 3rd party only, and as you have said your car is highly modified, youd probubly want fully comp anyway.
Also, DOC is 3rd party only, and as you have said your car is highly modified, youd probubly want fully comp anyway.
Doesn't matter what they believe does it, matters what they can prove.
Yes, there is a huge price difference - as he doesnt need a second insurance policy.
The car is uninsured to be left on public roads etc though.
Well... no.
Its their policy, if they decide not to pay out, its up to YOU to prove that they should...
Which you wont be able to do.
"ownership" is a legal term outside of the insurers definitions
Doesnt matter. The insurer could just say "its not her car, its yours, and shes not the primary users either, like the policy implies, so were not paying out".
Just because you made up some critera doesnt bind the insurer to pay out. Its up to them, and if they dont want to, its up to you to prove them wrong.
[TW]Fox;15806567 said:Yes because its the right thing to do - but of course buying an insurance policy is going to be more expensive than... not buying one
but presumably they would have to buy one either for her or for him.
Unless it lives on a trailer everywhere but the track
Actually, why not just buy a trailer?
Well it could obviously live on his driveway.
It's definitely a bad idea, for this reason, and you'll be pulled all the time.
The insurer can't just decide in their own mind that the car isn't yours and then not pay out without any proof though, that's ridiculous.