Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheBoy]

Not in my experience it isn't. From memory only three policies have had it since my first one in 1996. Certainly my current insurer doesn't offer it. 

Never, ever had a FC policy which didn't have it.  TPFT tend not to as standard, and commercial use is a different kettle of fish altogether.

It was lucky I spotted this sneaky change that was in no way highlighted, nor visible to most until the policy stated.

[STEMO]

Here's the wording on mine

Providing the above vehicle is still owned and insured under this policy, the Policyholder may also drive, subject to the owner's permission, any other motorcar which does not belong to him/her or is not hired or rented to him/her under a hire purchase, hire or leasing agreement.

[YZ250]

........
Its now only the policy holder AND if the car being insured is legally owned* by the Policy Holder.

*In Admiral's view, Legally Owned means name on V5, which is legally incorrect according to DVLA.

It can be a minefield of mis-information.    The owner not neccassarily being the registered keeper, the registered keeper not neccassarily being the main driver and so on. 
My daughter is the main driver of a car owned by me and the registered keeper is also me. She has a policy with Admiral for this car, I have no policy on it as I don't drive it since handing it over for my daughters use. Gets well confusing when you read the terminology as she is neither the owner or registered keeper, but she is the main driver, which sort of goes against the registered keeper terminology. 

[hotel21]

We bounced around assorted insurance companies over the years for our two cars.  Things got a little muddled between named keepers, owners, primary drivers and the like so we did a consolidation in order to get on the correct side of the small print.

What seemed universal and also echoed my previous trades experiences was the reg keeper/primary driver/other cars use extension. 

DOC is far and away only for named policy holder only and for third party only.  Further, the other car must have a stand alone insurance policy in force and not reliant on the DOC driver, thus preventing an uninsured car magically becoming insured because your Harris is in the drivers seat.

In the main, the majority of scrotes I dealt with back in the day relied on this as a get out of jail card.  Watching more current interceptors type telly shows that it’s still a very common misunderstanding.  It is quite expensive and so, rare, to get 3rd party cover on current fully comps.  If you do, at no extra cost, then we’ll done.

[Entwood]

From my Policy ...

5. Persons or classes of persons entitled to drive
Insured and Spouse
The policyholder may also drive a motorcar not belonging to him/her and not hired to him/her under a hire purchase or leasing agreement, as long as the policyholder has the owner's permission to drive it.

[Doctor Gollum]

From my Policy ...

5. Persons or classes of persons entitled to drive
Insured and Spouse
The policyholder may also drive a motorcar not belonging to him/her and not hired to him/her under a hire purchase or leasing agreement, as long as the policyholder has the owner's permission to drive it.

If you were to have an accident whilst doing so, your insurers could drive a fleet of buses through the gaping chasm in that clause

[STEMO]

Seems clear enough to me.

[Doctor Gollum]

It's more what it doesn't say

[STEMO]

It's more what it doesn't say

It says enough 

[Entwood]

From my Policy ...

5. Persons or classes of persons entitled to drive
Insured and Spouse
The policyholder may also drive a motorcar not belonging to him/her and not hired to him/her under a hire purchase or leasing agreement, as long as the policyholder has the owner's permission to drive it.

If you were to have an accident whilst doing so, your insurers could drive a fleet of buses through the gaping chasm in that clause

As they wrote the clause, any attempt to "get around" it would fall squarely under present legislation:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50

as amended by

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted

[TheBoy]

DOC is far and away only for named policy holder only and for third party only.  Further, the other car must have a stand alone insurance policy in force and not reliant on the DOC driver, thus preventing an uninsured car magically becoming insured because your Harris is in the drivers seat.

The thing with Admiral, as well as the above, the policy holder needs to be the legal owner (which they define as the name the V5 is in).  Its this last bit that I've never come across before, and certainly wasn't in my previous Admiral policy that I had up until a year ago.


Turns out, Admiral changed their policy back in 2015, but only applied it to new customers, hence why I didn't have this restriction previously.

Additionally, Admiral upheld my complaint and gave me another £25 as well as agreeing a full refund on the policy I took out


Seems it will be easier to put TBE's replacement in her name going forward, as I suspect other insurance companies will forllow suit at some point.

[hotel21]

Seems Admiral are changing reality to suit themselves.  Even DVLA recognise that the v5 registered keeper does not prove ownership!

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I got my renewal through from Aviva a few days ago. It had dropped slightly to £215.
Went online, through Quidco. Got fully comp, protected no claims, £45 excess, insured to drive other cars with Hastings for £174.
£35 cashback to come so actually £141. 

[STEMO]

I got my renewal through from Aviva a few days ago. It had dropped slightly to £215.
Went online, through Quidco. Got fully comp, protected no claims, £45 excess, insured to drive other cars with Hastings for £174.
£35 cashback to come so actually £141. 

Your postcode must be clean. Mine isn't 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

They know your a doddery old ficker.