Alpina B10V8S insurance problems

Dr. Pain said:
Dont know dont care.

I was just making a point about DOC cover needing an existing policy on the car, or you are driving uninsured.
Click to expand...

There is no law which requires a car to be insured before someone can drive it using DOC. You must simply adhere to your insurers terms and conditions, SOME of which do stipulate that the car must be insured, many of which do not. Whilst it is true that the stupid new 'no tax unless its insured' rule puts paid to the idea of having a car without insurance in its own right that isn't SORN (and therefore cannot be driven on the road), this is an entirely different offence and is the problem of the registered keeper - somebody else can still legally drive the car if its taxed with no insurance if he has DOC which doesn't stipulate in the T&C's that the other car must be insured.

It really is that simple - and your idea doesn't work as it doesn't cover cars you own, which is separate to who is The registered keeper.

Therefore what your idea is fraud.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;19881455 said:
There is no law which requires a car to be insured before someone can drive it using DOC. You must simply adhere to your insurers terms and conditions, SOME of which do stipulate that the car must be insured, many of which do not. Whilst it is true that the stupid new 'no tax unless its insured' rule puts paid to the idea of having a car without insurance in its own right that isn't SORN (and therefore cannot be driven on the road), this is an entirely different offence and is the problem of the registered keeper - somebody else can still legally drive the car if its taxed with no insurance if he has DOC which doesn't stipulate in the T&C's that the other car must be insured.

It really is that simple - and your idea doesn't work as it doesn't cover cars you own, which is separate to who is The registered keeper.

Therefore what your idea is fraud.
Click to expand...

Wtf u on about "my idea".... jees talk about pedantic.. I was just loosely talking over a point just to show that if DOC cover was really as good as people thought it was, then technically you could keep driving a bunch of cars with just one policy, providing they are all taxed.

They would still show up as not insured on the database though.

I'd be surprised if there was ANY insurers, with the exception of trade policies, that did not require the vehicle to have a policy on it already.

Anyway, its a totally meaningless side issue, I was correct with a policy being required for Admiral, as I suspected.
 
[TW]Fox;19882042 said:
There are plenty of insurers which don't require it, admiral themselves have only done so for just over a year.
Click to expand...

So they are happy for people to be driving cars that have no policy on them at all ?

So there is nothing stopping you purchasing a used car with a full years tax and running around in it without having to insure it on a policy?

Surely this is madness? ANPR would have you pulled faster than Frankie Boyle gig at the Vatican..
 
And where would you keep the car when you arent driving it? Unless you have a garage or can hide it off the road then you'd be in breach of the law as far as im reading my insurance/tax docs..
 
Dr. Pain said:
So they are happy for people to be driving cars that have no policy on them at all ?

So there is nothing stopping you purchasing a used car with a full years tax and running around in it without having to insure it on a policy?

Surely this is madness? ANPR would have you pulled faster than Frankie Boyle gig at the Vatican..
Click to expand...

Yup

thats why Admiral and others have started to change. Because of EXACTLY that.

But not all have done so.
 
Dr. Pain said:
I'd be surprised if there was ANY insurers, with the exception of trade policies, that did not require the vehicle to have a policy on it already.
Click to expand...

Having worked for Direct Line for over 18 months i can guarantee that the car does not need insurance in place for DOC to be in effect unless they've changed anything in the last 2 weeks whilst i've been on holiday.

It also applies to all the other brands that they underwrite.

The insurers you are using must be useless if they can't look this Alpina up as this is what we'd do, either that or the staff member you've spoken to is an idiot.
 
Dr. Pain said:
So they are happy for people to be driving cars that have no policy on them at all ?
Click to expand...

Some still are, yes.

So there is nothing stopping you purchasing a used car with a full years tax and running around in it without having to insure it on a policy?
Click to expand...

Yes - there is everything stopping this. DOC does not cover cars owned by you - if you bought a used car, you own it and cannot use DOC to cover it.

True, you could lie and commit insurance fraud but thats illegal and thus irrelevent.

Surely this is madness?
Click to expand...

If it were the case, it would be. But as above, it isn't.

ANPR would have you pulled faster than Frankie Boyle gig at the Vatican..
Click to expand...

Correct - and if you could prove you were driving somebody elses car under a DOC policy that allows you to do so, you'd be on your way and if you couldn't, you'd get nicked.
 
Dr. Pain said:
S
So there is nothing stopping you purchasing a used car with a full years tax and running around in it without having to insure it on a policy?
Click to expand...
Other than the fact that DOC extensions cover you to drive cars that are NOT owned by you.... nothing at all.
 
Managed to get insurance sorted on the way up with admiral (thanks ollym).

Home and safe :D

IMG_0627.JPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom