Insurance Question! (DOC)
- Thread starter Sugar Free
- Start date
I drive an M5 on my Bell DOC every now and again
The thing is anyone who's going to let a relative or mate drive their car third party has to have faith in their driving ability, it's a massive risk. Thus you'd like to think that the younger drivers who roll M5s and the like on DOC are more sensible drivers than the average Saxo aiittte chav. That and if I were driving somebody else's M5 I'd be ridiculously careful.
Even my first car had 130bhp and I've driven a 231bhp RWD car for the past 2.5 years without any incidents (apart from when somebody went in to the back of me, but that wasn't my fault, the guy wasn't paying attention). I'd like to think I am a bit more sensible than a lot of people my age (and hopefully a more capable driver).
You're right though, I'd never go mad in a car I was only covered TPO on.
You're right though, I'd never go mad in a car I was only covered TPO on.
- Joined
- 7 May 2004
- Posts
- 197
I just want to drive a Corsa, a Picanto and a Freelander from time to time 
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 960
- Location
- Derbyshire
i'm slightly confused by this statement, surely it's no more of a risk than if you cover your own car 3rd party, but I would emagine those who drive M5's and the like are FC anyway.???
hang on have I got the wrong end of the stick. I thought , here goes
althought your using a 3rd party cover for DOC , if the vehicle was FC then (the owner FC that is) the car is still covered FC. so your not really driving 3rd party , just your insurance company will only cover you for 3rd party damage, the owners cover will cover the car. after all thats what you pay for. and it would mean two losses of NC for example. ???
bullit
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 960
- Location
- Derbyshire
well Iv've just read MY insurance dos and it apears what I though was right was wrong.. damn
exsert :
On the same basis that We cover You under this section, We also cover:
any person driving Your Car with Your permission, but only if Your Certificate names that person and allows that person to drive;
seems FC will only work if they're on the named drivers list.
oh well live and learn
bullit
exsert :
On the same basis that We cover You under this section, We also cover:
any person driving Your Car with Your permission, but only if Your Certificate names that person and allows that person to drive;
seems FC will only work if they're on the named drivers list.
oh well live and learn
bullit
when i got my policy (month ago) it said on the website, and when i rang them up that the car must be covered by another persons insurance. BUT i cannot fathom why, and there is no mention of it being that way on the policy documents. I wonder if it's just something that they are trying to get people to beleive to avoid DOC being abused.
It could be because for the car to be on the road (even just parked) it has to be covered by insurance (IIRC), and DOC generally only covers it whilst you are actually in it - the moment you get out of the car it could potentially be uninsured.
I think DOC tends to get abused a lot, so they are getting stricter and much more precise about the conditions under which it applies (I think at one point they didn't have the line about it only applying to cars not owned by the person using the DOC, with the inevitable results from what i've heard).
I think DOC tends to get abused a lot, so they are getting stricter and much more precise about the conditions under which it applies (I think at one point they didn't have the line about it only applying to cars not owned by the person using the DOC, with the inevitable results from what i've heard).
Thats lol, if you put motor mechanic it goes up to £1950
It must be a different rate for different jobs.
I just checked again and I've got a policy saved which i will be buying soon and it has doc ticked for £27
People in the motor industry are charged more for DOC and a lot of companies dont offer it at all, for fear that they'll use it to drive customer cars around.
Occupation is a huge modifier
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
This has always been a feature of the DOC extension of conventional insurance, it is pretty much the cornerstone of this facility.
The person who spoke to you must be an idiot. It makes absolutely NO economic or legal sense whatsoever.
Erm no, the person he spoke to explained the correct policy. The insured status of the vehicle is irrelevent to the insurer providing DOC - it doesn't make any difference to them.
If you crash a car on DOC with fully comp insurance in somebody elses name, your insurer pays for third party damage. If you crash a car on DOC with no other insurance, your insurer pays for third party damage. The outcome is the same. The status of the car once you step out of it is of no concern to the insurer providing the DOC extension as their liability for the third party risk ends when you step out of the car, regardless of its insured status.
Why do you think the person he spoke to was an idiot?
[TW]Fox;14185121 said:
Car insurance is a legal requirement because it is deemed a benefit.
What you're saying basically allows someone to buy an old banger, insure it and then buy a load of insurance group 17-20 cars and drive them without paying more for fully comprehensive insurance on each car. It defies why we are legally required to have car insurance in the first place.