Insurance Dilemma

Soldato
Joined
7 Nov 2002
Posts
12,364
Location
Snorbans, UK
Hi All,

I'm picking up a new car on Sunday, which means that I'd have 2 cars on the driveway. This isn't a problem in itself, however the new SORN/Insurance rules are a pain in the arse.

I want to keep my old car insured for the time being, in order to facilitate test drives etc.

My other option is to drive the new car home using DayInsure or similar, then immediately SORN it (and hope that I don't get caught in the meantime) - however this means me losing nearly a month's tax value when I return the tax disc. Then once my old car is sold, switch my insurance over.

What would be my best option in this scenario?

Thanks.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Dec 2005
Posts
12,488
Location
Bath
I transfered my policy to the new car, and then took out temporary cover on the old car for £50/month (all with the same insurer).
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
7 Nov 2002
Posts
12,364
Location
Snorbans, UK
I checked with my current insurer, Swiftcover, and they want £88 to add the new car for a month. Any ideas as to whether I'd be able to get a part refund if I see the old car sooner?
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jul 2011
Posts
3,534
Location
Staffordshire
No it isn't :(

Come christmas I will have two (maybe even three if I can't find anyone moronic enough to buy the focus) cars - I don't want to keep taxing and sorning them as and when I want to use them. Royal PITA.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Oct 2006
Posts
5,665
Location
Midlands
No it isn't :(

Come christmas I will have two (maybe even three if I can't find anyone moronic enough to buy the focus) cars - I don't want to keep taxing and sorning them as and when I want to use them. Royal PITA.

On the flip side it helps keep a few uninsured morons off the road.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Oct 2006
Posts
5,665
Location
Midlands
Do you really think it will stop them? No.

If they were (in this case) stupid enough to tax the car and not have it insured then they automatically get caught. Them not taxing the car and therefore not getting caught is a different matter though.
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Aug 2003
Posts
37,247
Location
Cheshire
Do you not think that a) the majority of uninsured drivers will have no tax anyway (given you need a valid insurance certificate/policy to buy tax at the post office/online), and b) they won't give a **** about tax if they don't give a **** about insurance.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Oct 2006
Posts
5,665
Location
Midlands
Do you not think that a) the majority of uninsured drivers will have no tax anyway (given you need a valid insurance certificate/policy to buy tax at the post office/online), and b) they won't give a **** about tax if they don't give a **** about insurance.

Well a) I'm pretty sure I said a FEW uninsured drivers, not all of them b) I also stated that catching those that didn't tax and so therefore won't get caught by the automated system is another issue entirely (which could still be resolved to a degree with more cameras checking plates) c) I could easily drive my car around with no insurance for 10 months but still be taxed since my tax is due before my insurance. All it would take is for me to forget to sort it out which I imagine does happen.

So where exactly is the harm in a database running a check every day to see which cars are taxed but not insured?

Your attitude seems to suggest that since it's not catching the ***** majority then they just shouldn't bother. Old lady McDermish who just forgot to renew her policy needs to be caught too because driving and not being insured is just not on, whether you did it by accident or because you are a rebel without a cause.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Jan 2003
Posts
17,499
Location
Bristol, UK
I insured a car with admiral and then cancelled within 14 days (double check this time-frame) when I needed "temporary" cover. I was charged about £20 in admin fee's in total.
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Aug 2003
Posts
37,247
Location
Cheshire
So where exactly is the harm in a database running a check every day to see which cars are taxed but not insured?

Your attitude seems to suggest that since it's not catching the ***** majority then they just shouldn't bother. Old lady McDermish who just forgot to renew her policy needs to be caught too because driving and not being insured is just not on, whether you did it by accident or because you are a rebel without a cause.

That's great, but why should I have to keep my 2nd car insured all year round, just for those few weekends when I want to take it for a blast?

As the law used to stand, I could leave it taxed (relatively low cost compared to insurance), and then insure it as and when the weather is nice enough to warrant it.

Now, I either have to insure it full time, or leave it SORN. Leaving it SORN makes it impossible to wake up, look at the weather, think to myself "epic weather, let's take the other car today", ring my insurers and off I drive.

It's a daft system that does very little to help, and a whole bucket load to hinder.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Oct 2006
Posts
5,665
Location
Midlands
That's great, but why should I have to keep my 2nd car insured all year round, just for those few weekends when I want to take it for a blast?

As the law used to stand, I could leave it taxed (relatively low cost compared to insurance), and then insure it as and when the weather is nice enough to warrant it.

Now, I either have to insure it full time, or leave it SORN. Leaving it SORN makes it impossible to wake up, look at the weather, think to myself "epic weather, let's take the other car today", ring my insurers and off I drive.

It's a daft system that does very little to help, and a whole bucket load to hinder.

While I can completely understand how the change in the law has affected you and other owners of vehicles that only get used for a few days of the year, I fail to see how you can say that it does very little to help unless you have seen the statistics of how many people have been caught since its inception.

If it's only caught 3 people since it was brought in then of course its pointless for the hassle (or more importantly the expense) that it causes classic/summer car owners. But if its catching a lot of people then it is saving a everyone else on the road from potentially being in an accident with an uninsured car. Whether that car is uninsured on purpose or by "accident".

As I said, I know its not catching them all because if you don't have it taxed then this system won't catch you, but I can understand why they made the change so long as it is actually catching enough people.

I'd love to see the stats if they exist.
 
Top Bottom