Insurance Question! (DOC)
- Thread starter Sugar Free
- Start date
Parents, friends, relatives... there are ways around it.
One of my mates knows someone who has a Bell policy on a crap car, he gave his dad the money to buy an old Impreza, and he drives that 3rd party the whole time.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
What are you talking about here? Not sure I understand that sentance.
It would do if what you said is correct. It is not. The DOC extension on an insurance policy applies to cars not 'owned by, or leased to under the terms of a hire purchase agreement, the policyholder'. So no, you cant insure a Panda and use it to drive your M3. Not even if you pretend its Dads M3.
scott212 is incorrect - although exact wording varies from insurer to insurer, most companies state the car does not have to be insured by anybody to be covered under your DOC.
Example, my friend has a 205 GTI parked up that he does not use, I may legally use this car under my DOC extension. Cover would be restricted to TPO.
Example, my friend has a 205 GTI parked up that he does not use, I may legally use this car under my DOC extension. Cover would be restricted to TPO.
There is no question as to why Third Party cover is a legal requirement. What is being explained to you (and does not seem to be getting through) is that the other car does NOT have to have any other insurance attached to it. The insurer may state this as a stipulation to reduce abuse, but LEGALLY there is no requirement.
As I'm always wrong and he's always right...
[TW]Fox;14178738 said:
They're offering basic level of insurance for very little and THAT is why it does mean a lot too the insurer if people start abusing it and that is why Bell have obviously increased the cost of adding DOC to a policy. When I took out my policy I was told on the phone it is supposed to only be used for emergencies. It is still miles cheaper to drive a car like that than it is to take out a dedicated third party policy with an insurer.
That argument failing, why do you think most insurers insist that the driver has to be over 25 to use DOC on a policy. Because they don't want young drivers who would not be able to obtain a dedicated third party quote on high insurance group cars (let alone fully comp) driving them with their DOC policy. They are statistically massively more likely to crash and there's absolutely nothing whatsoever to reflect this in terms of price on the policy or to cover the extra risk incurred by young drivers driving such cars.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 8 May 2008
- Posts
- 417
- Location
- Leeds/Cambridge Uni.
If they cost it up and charge an appropriate amount to cover the risk of you causing damage to a third party whilst driving a car on DOC (and their own overheads/profits) then it obviously makes sense to them.
I think you're trying to say: "It makes no economic sense for the insurer to do that because the insured person will go out and get into the nearest M3 and crash it into someone else causing loads of damage"
If that's what you're trying to say with "economic sense" then that can be accounted for in cost (hence why mechanic, who is more likely to be in a position to drive a powerful car and cause 3rd party damage will be charged a lot more than someone who is less likely to be able to drive that powerful car)
Legally - makes absolutely no difference to the insurer.