Insurance - If a car is in my name, does it have to be insured?

[Verbium]

There is more to this than meets the eye, i'm asking because i'm not sure if what my dad is looking to do is legal and/or will get me into trouble.

So here's the full story:

My Dad has just bought a new car but is looking to drive it using his current insurance on his other car. He is then allowed to drive any car that's not in his name as third party. He's looking to register it in my name so that he can drive it without invalidating his policy and to be covered. The question is, would I then be required to insure this car as its technically under my name and my understanding is that all cars in your name have to be insured.

If the car is classed as being insured as my Dad is driving it then great, but i don't want to get caught with it in my name to find it doesn't count as being insured!

Any legal buffs that would be able to answer the question? Google hardly helps on this matter :/

 

[Fr0dders]

if the car is registered to your name and there is no insurance listed against your name your dad will be stopped any time he passes an ANPR traffic car. Expect lots of hassle and expect to have the documents handy.

He will legally be insured to drive the car, and plod will let him go on his way. But the simple fact is that the insurance database will show now valid insurance and he's going to get pulled a lot for it.

*edit* theres also the small matter of what he's doing with the car that he's got the insurance on. If he's fronting the insurance on the other car, then using D.O.C cover (the bit that lets him drive anybodys car) to drive another car day to day, he's also commiting insurance fraud too. Its very possible if your dad gets pulled for it too much the cops can report him to the insurers.

 

[SB118]

The car would be covered while he is driving, but the moment he parked at the side of the road and walked away it would be uninsured. If was noticed by a police car driving passed with an ANPR unit, it would be clamped/towed. Also he wouldn't be able to tax it using his DOC cover.

 

[mejinks]

im lead to believe that third party on another car is only valid while other car has fully comp in someone elses name.

 

[Fr0dders]

The car would be covered while he is driving, but the moment he parked at the side of the road and walked away it would be uninsured. If was noticed by a police car driving passed with an ANPR unit, it would be clamped/towed. Also he wouldn't be able to tax it using his DOC cover.

both good points

It's only insured while he's driving it, and not insured for theft if its stolen from your driveway, and you will need a valid insurance policy on the actual vehicle to tax it.

im lead to believe that third party on another car is only valid while other car has fully comp in someone elses name.

it could be on the policy you looked at. But each and every insurer approaches this differently. To cut short, check your dad's smallprint on his insurance, as every insurer is different.

 

[SB118]

im lead to believe that third party on another car is only valid while other car has fully comp in someone elses name.

I've seen that posted often, but in the policies i've had with DOC cover there has been no mention of the other cars being covered by other insurance, just a matter of them not being owned by the policy holder. I think it works on the basis of it doesn't matter if the car has a separate policy or not as it's currently being covered by yours.

 

[[TW]Fox]

He cannot do this becuase he is missing something crucial.

He may drive, third party, any car that is not OWNED by him. Note that this says OWNED not KEPT.

The registered keeper is not neccesarily the legal owner. It's his car, he bought it, irrespective of who is the registered keeper. Pretending it's yours so he can drive it without having to purchase an insurance policy for it is fraud.

 

[SGWills]

fox is correct, you will find that they are starting to clamp down a lot more on the DOC clause of a policy.

the car has to be insured else where, this might work out more expensive its in your name, secondly, your dad's insurance company T&C might say he can drive any car however a lot of companies have a line that state that the DOC is for inregular use, and thirdly i shall part on a story that i have dealt with in the past, one customer called up complaining that his friends car had been clamped, now the guy who was driving had DOC and the other car was insured, however it turned out he was stopped earlier by the police and was a bit cocky, so when the guy pulled in to fill his mates car with petrol the car was clamped and towed for the guy not having insurance for the car, technically the car wasnt being driven at the time so the police took the car off him, some might think its an old wifes tale but i cant hovis a story

 

[[TW]Fox]

It doesn't neccesarily need to be insured in its own right, this is down to the individual insurer.

 

[SB118]

fox is correct, you will find that they are starting to clamp down a lot more on the DOC clause of a policy.

It's mainly to catch up with all the kids insuring the 1.2 clio and then taking "dads" scooby out on the road.

... the car has to be insured else where ...

It's all dependant on who your policy is with, personally i've never had that requirement with any of the DOC facilities i've had.

 

[SGWills]

It doesn't neccesarily need to be insured in its own right, this is down to the individual insurer.

most insurance companys will ask for it to be insured, if its being driven but it has not got insurance why is it being driven ?

It's mainly to catch up with all the kids insuring the 1.2 clio and then taking "dads" scooby out on the road.

it is down to individual insurer but you will find it becoming a lot more common for the reason you gave

It's all dependant on who your policy is with, personally i've never had that requirement with any of the DOC facilities i've had.

it is down to individual insurer but you will find it becoming a lot more common for the reason you gave

 

[Verbium]

Thanks for the feedback guys, although the idea would work. The driver would basically have to keep the car running and in it whilst in public areas until onto private property.

This has managed to convince my dad to insure it properly, at least then i can drive it sometimes now with my insurance too lol.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Thanks for the feedback guys, although the idea would work.

Well no, it wouldn't, unless you dont mind defrauding the insurer in which case why not simply insure it as a 1.1 Panda.

 

[SGWills]

beaten by mr fox lol it wouldnt work in all honesty. if its his main vehicle he would be better off swapping it on to his insurance so that he is covered or putting it on his existing policy as a temp vehicle, insurance companies have started to cut down on this sort of DOC. the only problem with DOC use all the time is its more luck than a certain way of driving the car, like i said all you need is the wrong police man stopping you or informing the wrong person of how your dad has insured his car (if he went ahead with it that is ) and you will have the insurance company asking a lot more details at renewal

 

[Verbium]

It wouldn't mean he didn't drive his other car, it would still be for irregular use. The car would still be mine, but i just wouldn't be driving it.

Although from anyone who has suspicious eyes would instantly think what you think.

 

[SGWills]

It wouldn't mean he didn't drive his other car, it would still be for irregular use. The car would still be mine, but i just wouldn't be driving it.

Although from anyone who has suspicious eyes would instantly think what you think.

better off trying to get a better discount for insuring two cars with one company

 

[SB118]

... it is down to individual insurer but you will find it becoming a lot more common for the reason you gave

Must plead guilty here, i did use the wifes car which was over double the power of mine using my DOC cover.

 

[SGWills]

Must plead guilty here, i did use the wifes car which was over double the power of mine using my DOC cover.

its a common thing, using it the odd occassion is fine from what i been told but when its a case of insuring a 1 litre "beast" and then driving a 150 litre super turbo charged "pocket rocket" is way they are trying to restrict the use on it

 

[Avalon]

Who would be stupid enough to buy a new car (assuming significant cash outlay) and drive it on DOC ? If it's stolen you loose, if it's vandalised you loose, if it's burnt out you loose, if you have a prang you loose. If you try to make a claim the insurance co will investigate and you will most likley loose. One of my policys made specific restrictions on the DOC for family members in the same household iirc (i've had three different underwriters in three months but that's another story) but the other two didn't.

 

[K.C. Leblanc]

Why doesn't your dad phone his insurer and ask them?

But generaly DOC cover requires the other vehicle to be owned by someone else and to be insured by it's owner.