Is it legal for a provisional driver to have passengers other than the supervising driver

[MikeHiow]

What makes you believe that, after I actually told you he was not insured to drive my car.

I'm not guessing here, he claimed he was not insured.

 

[OllyM]

Astonishingly, I agree with what Mike is saying - you do not need to be insured on the car to supervise a learner driver.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/LearnerAndNewDrivers/LearningToDriveOrRide/DG_4022661

 

[Abraham]

What makes you believe that, after I actually told you he was not insured to drive my car.

I'm not guessing here, he claimed he was not insured.

Aside from the point of whether it's a requirement, I'd be truely surprised if a driving instructor had cover which didn't include DOC.

 

[Burnsy2023]

Astonishingly, I agree with what Mike is saying - you do not need to be insured on the car to supervise a learner driver.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/LearnerAndNewDrivers/LearningToDriveOrRide/DG_4022661

Indeed. Common misnomer.

 

[MikeHiow]

Aside from the point of whether it's a requirement, I'd be truely surprised if a driving instructor had cover which didn't include DOC.

Even though I've already told you he didn't?

 

[Gilly]

I'm surprised that an instructor doesn't have DOC.

Not surprised enough to argue the point, but surprised nonetheless.

 

[edscdk]

Are you guessing?

When I learnt to drive, I had many lessons in my own car, which my driving instructor was not insured to drive.

I thought as long as you are fully comp on your car you will be 3rd party on jsut about any other?

 

[MikeHiow]

I'm surprised that an instructor doesn't have DOC.

Not surprised enough to argue the point, but surprised nonetheless.

I'm not sure why an instructor is more likely to have DOC than you or I?

I thought as long as you are fully comp on your car you will be 3rd party on jsut about any other?

Nope, many insurance companies offer this with increasingly more restrictive terms, but it isn't a given.

 

[Abraham]

Even though I've already told you he didn't?

You told me he said he didn't, that's not necessarily the same.
He may have had 3rd party DOC but didn't want to risk your car, he would still have been insured though. A driving instructor is different from just someone accompanying you in the car, they could in all likelihood have to take over the controls, and I'd fully expect them to be insured to do so, irrespective of what he told you.

I'm trying to find whether instructors need instructor insurance, but all instructor insurance I can find covers pupils cars.

 

[Building Candy]

Astonishingly, I agree with what Mike is saying

 

[VFM Addict]

No. They need to be able to legally drive the car themselves.

????? Yep they need to hold a licence and be insured for that car. But there is no need for them to actually have driven in the last 53 years !!!

 

[t3kno_tr0n|c]

????? Yep they need to hold a licence and be insured for that car. But there is no need for them to actually have driven in the last 53 years !!!

Im sorry, but this is utterly incorrect.

They jsut need to be over 21, and have to have had a licence for more than 3 years.

Being insured to drive the car has nothing to do with it.

Why do people keep spouting the same total garbage like is gospel ?

 

[Abraham]

Im sorry, but this is utterly incorrect.

They jsut need to be over 21, and have to have had a licence for more than 3 years.

Being insured to drive the car has nothing to do with it.

Why do people keep spouting the same total garbage like is gospel ?

Despite having been recently quoted, I have learnt since the link was posted that you're correct. I had thought this was the case, but seemed more sensible they needed to be able to drive it.

I am fairly sure a fully licenced/insured driving instructor would have cover to drive a pupils car though, and would be concerned if they didnt.