Pulled by the police 6 points and £300 fine

[jackso11]

Of course they can. If your insurance says 'for the policy holder only' someone else who's insurance entitles them to drive any car can come along and drive your car.

 

The 'for the policy holder only' relates to your insurance document not your car.

[Shane]

Of course they can. If your insurance says 'for the policy holder only' someone else who's insurance entitles them to drive any car can come along and drive your car.

 

The 'for the policy holder only' relates to your insurance document not your car.

 

 

Have to say that's exactly how I see it, but would be good to have it confirmed.

[Dr_Doom]

Of course they can. If your insurance says 'for the policy holder only' someone else who's insurance entitles them to drive any car can come along and drive your car.

 

The 'for the policy holder only' relates to your insurance document not your car.

 

 

Otherwise mechanics etc wouldn't be covered to drive your car under their trader's policy.

[jackso11]

Exactly

[jackso11]

Someone else can't have a policy that cancels out your own policy, but they can have a policy that only covers themselves on one car.

[sean17650199]

Right thats the police just been round and they said its because my policy was taken out when i was 24 i turned 25 a month after . They said you have to be 25 to drive any car but i didnt know i had to let the insurance know it was my birthday i just thought your d.o.b gave that away.

 

 

[Chris Wilson]

Is that the best they have to occupy their time with at the moment? No wonder our kids

are being shredded by shrapnel and our women are having their throats slashed.

 

Makes my blood boil ! Are they prosecuting? Just hope the dimwits fill in some form wrong,

it's their cretinous sloppiness that made Nick Freeman a multi millionaire, not his mastery of

the British legal system

[Ric]

that IS bs, you were over 25, none case IMO, the insurance have your DOB, they know you're over 25... stupidity, surely?

[Al Massey]

Someone else can't have a policy that cancels out your own policy, but they can have a policy that only covers themselves on one car.

 

Not true.

My policy on my car is policy holder only, but I'm covered to drive other cars as stated in my policy.

 

And trader/business insurance is different to personal insurance.

[sean17650199]

Few more things to add, they want to see my partner and tell her that she can possibly be charged over this aswell for allowing me to drive her car i'll get hung if she gets done aswell think il just do a runner the police dont bother me but f*#k getting on her bad side haha

 

 

[Hitbox Junkie]

Have they said there going to charge you. I would challenge it as your 25.. surely your insurance know this other wise what's the point in the dob.

[jackso11]

Not true.

My policy on my car is policy holder only, but I'm covered to drive other cars as stated in my policy.

 

And trader/business insurance is different to personal insurance.

 

It is true.

 

You are interpreting your insurance incorrectly.

Your policy is for the policy holder only (you) to drive your car and you can drive other people's cars, that is correct, but the line 'policy holder only' doesn't stop your next door neighbour driving your car if their policy covers them to drive other cars. Your policy is not a 'block' for other people's policies, it just means your policy covers you and it doesn't cover anybody else...it doesn't need to as their policy will be allowing them to drive (although not covering any damage they cause to your car as it will most probably be third party only).

 

Traders insurance isn't magic insurance that lifts blocks made by other people's policies. It's just fully comp insurance for any car driven for business purposes unless a specific car is added to a list online in which case the driver trader will also be covered for personal use of that vehicle. I know this for a fact because I have traders insurance.

[Annabella]

Few more things to add, they want to see my partner and tell her that she can possibly be charged over this aswell for allowing me to drive her car i'll get hung if she gets done aswell think il just do a runner the police dont bother me but f*#k getting on her bad side haha

 

/QUOTE]

 

Seriously take legal advice, pay a solicitor for an hours time and show him/her what you have policy wise, document what the jobsworths have said and quote it and see what is said, sounds tosh to me that a reasonable judge will throw away. And yes they should be doing other stuff, but it's easy money and good for their figures.

[jackso11]

Seriously take legal advice, pay a solicitor for an hours time and show him/her what you have policy wise, document what the jobsworths have said and quote it and see what is said, sounds tosh to me that a reasonable judge will throw away. And yes they should be doing other stuff, but it's easy money and good for their figures.

 

Agree with that [emoji1360]

[stevie_b]

that IS bs, you were over 25, none case IMO, the insurance have your DOB, they know you're over 25... stupidity, surely?

Absolutely. There's only a case (albeit a jobsworth one) against the OP if he was under 25 when he was pulled over.

The insurance company could take a dim view of the OP using the DOC when he should have been added to his girlfriend's policy as a named driver, but that's a civil matter surely.

Not true.

My policy on my car is policy holder only, but I'm covered to drive other cars as stated in my policy.

 

And trader/business insurance is different to personal insurance.

Jackso's point is still valid. You can't have a policy that affects/overrides/cancels a clause in an unlinked policy. Your policy covers only you on your car (i.e. no other named drivers), and allows you to drive other cars. It doesn't make any judgement on whether other people can drive your car with your permission on their own policy.

[Al Massey]

My policy, as policy holder means that I am covered fully comp in my car.

If I was to drive someone else's car it's only third party insurance.

So of course I can have a block that doesn't allow people to drive my car third party only as my car then isn't insured at all for anything.

 

And if what you're saying is correct, why does my daily insurance states my insurance is for the named driver.

 

It's with the same company, both fully comp, only myself insured on both cars.

 

Why would there be two definitions?

 

 

 

[Shane]

My policy, as policy holder means that I am covered fully comp in my car.

If I was to drive someone else's car it's only third party insurance.

So of course I can have a block that doesn't allow people to drive my car third party only as my car then isn't insured at all for anything.

 

And if what you're saying is correct, why does my daily insurance states my insurance is for the named driver.

 

It's with the same company, both fully comp, only myself insured on both cars.

 

Why would there be two definitions?

 

 

/QUOTE]

 

Surely, your insurance policy is totally out of the equation here whilst the car is being driven by someone else at least. Your insurers have said your car is only insured for you and that's fine. I drive your car and my insurance policy covers me with 3rd party cover, it has nothing to do with your insurers other than they have made it clear your car isn't insured by them unless you are at the wheel.

[Annabella]

Surely, your insurance policy is totally out of the equation here whilst the car is being driven by someone else at least. Your insurers have said your car is only insured for you and that's fine. I drive your car and my insurance policy covers me with 3rd party cover, it has nothing to do with your insurers other than they have made it clear your car isn't insured by them unless you are at the wheel.

 

Correct.

[Al Massey]

Surely, your insurance policy is totally out of the equation here whilst the car is being driven by someone else at least. Your insurers have said your car is only insured for you and that's fine. I drive your car and my insurance policy covers me with 3rd party cover, it has nothing to do with your insurers other than they have made it clear your car isn't insured by them unless you are at the wheel.

 

Not really, as a car has to be insured to be on the road, so my car, not me, is insured to be driven by only me.

 

It is not the person who is insured but the car.

 

So if my policy states that only the policy holder may drive my car, that means no one else's policy will cover my car.

[Shane]

Not really, as a car has to be insured to be on the road, so my car, not me, is insured to be driven by only me.

 

It is not the person who is insured but the car.

 

So if my policy states that only the policy holder may drive my car, that means no one else's policy will cover my car.

 

I hear what you are saying, and your policy covers you when driving and your car when parked up. But your insurance company can not dictate to other insurers what they can or can not provide cover for. So you take you car for to Toyota for repair (with your credit card) and the mechanic takes your car out for a test drive to test what he's done and knocks over an old lady, so your insurance company obviously wont cover for damages but you are saying that they are also going to say that the garage's trade policy isn't valid either, how can they? Surely your insurance company has no say in it?

[Tricky-Ricky]

I have always understood it as this, and had it confirmed by my insurance company, i can drive any other vehicle that's not owned or hired to me, on my fully comprehensive policy, provided that the said vehicle is insured by somebody else, and the same applies but vice versa.

[stevie_b]

Not really, as a car has to be insured to be on the road, so my car, not me, is insured to be driven by only me.

 

It is not the person who is insured but the car.

 

So if my policy states that only the policy holder may drive my car, that means no one else's policy will cover my car.

 

Your car needs 3rd party insurance in order to be on the road. The car itself doesn't need to be insured - only insured for the damage it could cause to others.

 

Your policy will cover the car when it's not being driven. But when it is being driven, it covers the driver and any damage they may cause to themselves, the car, or third parties (assuming fully comp). Your policy states that only you are covered when it is being driven. That's fine - but it doesn't exclude other people from driving your car on their insurance.

What will exclude them, is if you don't give them permission to drive it. That would mean they have TWOC'd the car. The Driving Other Cars (DOC) clause always requires the owners/keeper's consent.

 

Perhaps you mean:

If I borrow your car using the DOC clause on my insurance and I crash it, your insurance won't help (it only covers you to drive). My insurance would pay for damage I've caused to 3rd parties, but not to your car. Damage to your car is uninsured here - that's why you really need to trust those who you let drive your car under DOC.

[Al Massey]

I hear what you are saying, and your policy covers you when driving and your car when parked up. But your insurance company can not dictate to other insurers what they can or can not provide cover for. So you take you car for to Toyota for repair (with your credit card) and the mechanic takes your car out for a test drive to test what he's done and knocks over an old lady, so your insurance company obviously wont cover for damages but you are saying that they are also going to say that the garage's trade policy isn't valid either, how can they? Surely your insurance company has no say in it?

 

No as trader/business policies are different as they cover the car completely whereas someone driving my car only covers third party.

 

I am guessing this is why its a grey area and no real clarification out there.

[mwilkinson]

Right thats the police just been round and they said its because my policy was taken out when i was 24 i turned 25 a month after . They said you have to be 25 to drive any car but i didnt know i had to let the insurance know it was my birthday i just thought your d.o.b gave that away.

 

/QUOTE]

 

I'm struggling to see a case here. You have never disclosed false information if you gave your correct date of birth to the insurance company. So long as you were 25 at the time you were driving your partners vehicle then you were appropriately insured.

 

What did the Officer say when you told him you were 25 at the time you were stopped driving the car?

 

I think it very unlikely your partner will be successfully prosecuted for a use/cause or permit offence. You told her you were insured and she had no reason to doubt it. I can't see where she has been reckless or negligent. Nor could she have been expected to examine your policy for technicalities she is not trained to make such an assessment on.

 

It might be worth speaking to your insurance company and getting a letter explaining they would offer cover for third party liability in the circumstances already explained.

 

Personally I would wait to see if you receive a summons first as I suspect this might not progress far.

[neilp9876]

According to money supermarket you may have to inform the insurer that you are now 25 and want DOC activated. So you may get caught.

 

Girlfriend... Make sure she says that you told her you were fully covered, she will be ok as long as she says she checked.

 

I got done for similar years ago... A friend borrowed my car and got pulled. The cops asked me whether he stole it from me or I lent it to him. I said I lent it and got done for 6 points as well as he had no insurance.

It wasn't till later I realised I could have said he told me he was insured!

 

Good luck