Driving just bought car home and insurance

[Duncan Wood]

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:20:08 +0100, steve robinson
<steve@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> Chris Whelan wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 21:45:26 +0100, steve robinson wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >> I would imagine that if the vehicle is otherwise uninsured, but
>> covered >> by the driver's insurance, it's legal until the moment the
>> driver stops
>>
>> >
>> > several of the large insurance companies have a rider tha the car
>> > must carry third party insurance if you wish to drive under your
>> > own policy if the vehicle is otherwise uninsured then your policy
>> > will not cover you
>>
>> Mine doesn't, but I still think there is potentially the problem
>> Ihave suggested.
>>
>> Chris
>
> All my policies have the clause now

Who'se is yours with?

[Duncan Wood]

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:44:46 +0100, steve robinson
<steve@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> Duncan Wood wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:20:08 +0100, steve robinson
>> <steve@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > Chris Whelan wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 21:45:26 +0100, steve robinson wrote:
>> > >
>> > > [...]
>> > >
>> >>>> I would imagine that if the vehicle is otherwise uninsured, but
>> >>covered >> by the driver's insurance, it's legal until the moment
>> the
>> > > driver stops
>> > >
>> > > >
>> >>> several of the large insurance companies have a rider tha the car
>> >>> must carry third party insurance if you wish to drive under your
>> >>> own policy if the vehicle is otherwise uninsured then your policy
>> >>> will not cover you
>> > >
>> > > Mine doesn't, but I still think there is potentially the problem
>> > > Ihave suggested.
>> > >
>> > > Chris
>> >
>> > All my policies have the clause now
>>
>> Who'se is yours with?
>
> aviva, Groupama

Cool, not using them then.

[Jethro_uk]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:41:12 +0000, Cynic wrote:

> Meanwhile the policy in PDF format has been
> emailed to me so that a print can be carried by my son until the
> original arrives in the post and the MIB database has been updated.

Sadly, we know, the police no longer trust the policy as proof. Which
raises the question on what timescale is the MID updated ? Hourly ?
Daily ? When it feels like it ?

[Mike P]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:23:53 +0000, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:41:12 +0000, Cynic wrote:
>
>> Meanwhile the policy in PDF format has been
>> emailed to me so that a print can be carried by my son until the
>> original arrives in the post and the MIB database has been updated.
>
> Sadly, we know, the police no longer trust the policy as proof. Which
> raises the question on what timescale is the MID updated ? Hourly ?
> Daily ?

>When it feels like it ?

That one, IME. I've been pulled twice for having no insurance, when I
have had insurance, both times the day after changing cars. It's not
really an inconvenience, just a bit annoying.

--
Mike P

[Jethro_uk]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:35:03 +0000, Mike P wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:23:53 +0000, Jethro_uk wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:41:12 +0000, Cynic wrote:
>>
>>> Meanwhile the policy in PDF format has been
>>> emailed to me so that a print can be carried by my son until the
>>> original arrives in the post and the MIB database has been updated.
>>
>> Sadly, we know, the police no longer trust the policy as proof. Which
>> raises the question on what timescale is the MID updated ? Hourly ?
>> Daily ?
>
>>When it feels like it ?
>
> That one, IME. I've been pulled twice for having no insurance, when I
> have had insurance, both times the day after changing cars. It's not
> really an inconvenience, just a bit annoying.

But given that *some* police stops have resulted in the car being
impounded, it's a helluva risk.

[DavidR]

On Jul 6, 12:48.pm, Chris Whelan <cawhe...@prejudicentlworld.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 04:12:38 -0700, DavidR wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Unnecessary - you might be viewing 5 different vehicles, so you don't
> >> want to insure all of them!
>
> > Viewing is not the same as going back to sign the deal.
>
> 'Viewing' as in a car, would imply 'test-driving' to most people.

In this case the 'viewing' was of a car being sold by a trader and
make no firm agreement. There was still the opportunity to go back
look and hand over the cash or walk away. (Except my son wanted to buy
over a freezing Christmas break before going back to uni so it was a
balance between being selective and keeping warm. Fortunately 6 months
later his grandmother sold him her car for a good price.)