Insurance

Hi all

I think I heard a news item this morning saying insurance is to become
compulsory even for laid-up vehicles (presumably including restoration
projects etc)

Has anyone else heard this, or got any info / links...?

Sorry this is a bit OT, but haven't been able to find any info elsewhere...

TIA

 

Heard this on the radio myself. as i understand it (admittedly without
looking into details) it will be some kind of SORN thing. Not sure of all
the implications myself, but the first thing springs to mind (apart from
drivers with no insurance) is those people who sell (trade?) cheap cars by
parking them at the side of the road. I've no great feelings one way or the
other about this practice, as long as they arent left in stupid places, but
if they are clamped down on for no insurance, well.........

Mike

 

Thanks Mike. I've just dug around some more and found this...
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_033114-02.hcsp

Para. 10 says "Providing that the keeper has made a Statutory Off Road
Declaration (SORN) to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), there
would be no requirement for insurance to be in place." So not as bad as I
first thought. It appears they intend to match vehicle records at Swansea
with the Insurance database, and duff people up even if the car has not been
seen on the road - unless they've filed a SORN.

The sooner road tax and insurance premiums are added to petrol, the better -
and think of the bureaucrats we could save (but that's just my view - and I
don't do colossal mileage...)

 

I don't know about the petrol idea; as a new driver, aged 20 (21 in 3
weeks), it would work out far cheaper for me for basic third party insurance
to be included in the price of petrol, and with the higher petrol price i'd
watch how, where, and when i drive far more, thus possibly reducing
accidents to some extent. There's so many things putting me off insuring my
car (it's SORN at the moment, and uninsured, as i'm not wanting ot use it on
the road just yet) as it's about £800 TFTP, and £1400 fully comp for an old
1996 micra.

I'm considering using a parent as the main driver, which I know is decidedly
dodgy as it's slightly dishonest, as I'd be the main driver and not them,
but how can they expect young drivers to get experience when they have
prices so ridiculously high? There should be some mandatory pass-plus
test...

 

uring the vehicle for you as a named driver on your parent's
insurance, if you are the registered owner of the vehicle and you are not
the main driver you may have problems should the need for a claim arise as
the insurance company would likely start asking awkward questions. If
however you transfer ownership of the vehicle to your parents then there
should not be a problem.

The main problem with insuring the car under someone else is that you do not
build your own 'no claims' discount, as this can be as much as 65% off your
premium you have to consider if it's just better to bite the bullet in the
early years. Oh, and do the pass plus scheme if you can, with a good
instructor and the right attitude it'll make you a better driver as well as
help with your insurance costs.

Neil

 

Just to clarify here. Car i own is insured under my partners name and I am a
named driver. I was involved in an accident few months ago and am disputing
who was liable ( saying wasnt my fault was theres basically ). So it will
make NO diffirence with any claim/accident for you because its owned by you
but insured under your parents name and you as a named driver. Insurance
companys will not ask any diffirent questions or akward questions weither
its owned by you or not. As long as your name is on the insurance policy and
the premiums are up to date then your covered. It is 100% legal. I have had
a few stop checks by police and had to go into police station to show all
relevent documents ( MOT/INSURANCE/ETC). No problems. Polite thank you from
the cops for coming in and showing them and i was on my way. Yes i fully
understand the hardship that high insurance rates cause young drivers today
and it "seems" unfair. But if you do a bit of surfing and look at accident
statistics in britain today, majority of major car accidents resulting in
injury or death are caused by certain age groups (under 25). Just put it
under your folks name as you as a named driver. When your older you will
have a few years driving experience since passing your test which will
probably give you the opportunity to take out your own policy and build up a
no claims bonus at a decent price. Good luck.

Essexgirl

 

There is a slight problem here though - not illegal - but I think immoral.

OK so your insurance premiums are low and you have an accident - who pays
for this. People like me through higher premiums. Thanks very much!

If you are more likely to have an accident - then be more careful - don't
try and load the risk and cost onto other drivers - cos that's what you are
doing. Take the premium on the chin and benefit from lower rates when you
have proven yourself as a safe driver.

Chris

 

There is a slight problem here though - not illegal - but I think immoral.

OK so your insurance premiums are low and you have an accident - who pays
for this. People like me through higher premiums. Thanks very much!

If you are more likely to have an accident - then be more careful - don't
try and load the risk and cost onto other drivers - cos that's what you are
doing. Take the premium on the chin and benefit from lower rates when you
have proven yourself as a safe driver.

Chris

 

I've absolutely no idea why this message was sent twice?

 

The moral of the story is Chris the guy cant afford to fork out for massive
premiums. Thats what hes saying? So why bother saying " pay the higher
premiums" ? Your post makes no sense and also spouts financial bollox about
premiums and who pays what if this/that happens. I also have my own
insurance policy for another car? Why? None of your business m8! Its not for
you to judge or say who should pay wot coz he done that n she done this so
"im paying higher premiums because of it. Bollox!!! Whats immoral and moral
in th

 

........continued from last post ( sent before finishing for some reason
sorry)

The moral of the story is Chris the guy cant afford to fork out for massive
premiums. Thats what hes saying? So why bother saying " pay the higher
premiums" ? Your post makes no sense and also spouts financial bollox about
premiums and who pays what if this/that happens. I also have my own
insurance policy for another car? Why? None of your business m8! Its not
for
you to judge or say who should pay wot coz he done that n she done this so
"im paying higher premiums because of it". Bollox!!! Whats immoral and
moral
in this dog eat dog world? Most people as long as they can stay on the
right side of the law
and live a quiet life would prefer to pay as little as possible for
anything. Its life and the way
us humans work. Pick between the lines in this post again if you want and
spout some more of
your high n mighty crap lol. Am outa here ;-) Happy crimbo bud.

Essexgirl