The Student Room Group

Overlapping car insurance??

I've recently passed my test and the plan is my mum has bought a new car and I'm buying her old car from her. She picked up the new car last night and is using the complimentary 3 day drive home insurance currently, meaning her old car is still insured by her old insurance policy for another 3 days. I obviously want to be able to use the car that is now mine as soon as possible but can I take out my own insurance on the car when her insurance is still on it or do I have to wait until she transfers her insurance first? Any thoughts on the actual answer or who I could call to find out would be very appreciated! TIA
Congratulations on passing your test! :smile:

Unfortunately you will have to tell your new insurer to start the policy in 3 days time, as you cannot have 2 policies running on a car at the same time.
Reply 2
It's frowned upon, but for the sake of 3 days, I highly doubt the new insurer will mind. If you're questioned on it, just mention the reasoning and they'll put it through no problem.

Can the old policy not just be cancelled 3 days early? It would solve the issue!
Original post by IWMTom
It's frowned upon, but for the sake of 3 days, I highly doubt the new insurer will mind. If you're questioned on it, just mention the reasoning and they'll put it through no problem.

Can the old policy not just be cancelled 3 days early? It would solve the issue!


I agree
As IWTom and Emma say (they're always right, by the way) it isn't really encouraged to have a car insured on two policies, but three days isn't too much of a problem. However, I'd be inclined to go with Tom's recommendation to cancel the old policy once you've arranged your own insurance.
What's the issue with two insurance policies? I would expect the insurance companies to be able to work-out which is the more specific insurance.

Before cancelling the existing policy, you might want to check the NCB position. I assume that your mother will have full NCB already though.
Original post by RogerOxon
What's the issue with two insurance policies? I would expect the insurance companies to be able to work-out which is the more specific insurance.


I think the problem is that both policies are equally valid - and in the event of a claim on one policy, that insurer would probably expect the other to contribute. The problem starts when the jointly-liable insurers disagree about how much each should contribute, or the value of the claim.
Original post by Reality Check
I think the problem is that both policies are equally valid - and in the event of a claim on one policy, that insurer would probably expect the other to contribute. The problem starts when the jointly-liable insurers disagree about how much each should contribute, or the value of the claim.

I would expect the policy that the driver holds to pay, and not the one where they're a named driver. I really can't see them minding that they're paid a full premium, but might not have to pay-out the full amount.
Lol my advice is start the new policy in 3 days and if you have to drive it then make sure you are sober and careful AF
Reply 9
Original post by Reality Check
I think the problem is that both policies are equally valid - and in the event of a claim on one policy, that insurer would probably expect the other to contribute. The problem starts when the jointly-liable insurers disagree about how much each should contribute, or the value of the claim.


Exactly the reason. They're concerned that someone would commit fraud by submitting two claims for the same incident.
Original post by Reality Check
I think the problem is that both policies are equally valid - and in the event of a claim on one policy, that insurer would probably expect the other to contribute. The problem starts when the jointly-liable insurers disagree about how much each should contribute, or the value of the claim.


Who ever was driving, their insurance should pay. See how easy it is.

If the car is stolen, then go by the registered keepers insurance. This system would sort out a huge proportion of such disputes, but the red tape industry doesnt do simple. If they could, they would rather use the LHC to do something that could also be done with a hammer.
Reply 11
Original post by Laomedeia
If the car is stolen, then go by the registered keepers insurance.


The only flaw with your otherwise well-thought plan is just the minor issue that a registered keeper is not necessarily the owner of a vehicle...

Spoiler

Original post by IWMTom
The only flaw with your otherwise well-thought plan is just the minor issue that a registered keeper is not necessarily the owner of a vehicle...

Spoiler




It'll do as a rule. Just make things simpler than they currently are.

Spoiler

Reply 13
Original post by Laomedeia
It'll do as a rule. Just make things simpler than they currently are.

Spoiler




No, it would not do as a rule. Law is very intricate, and insurance assessing even more so.
Original post by IWMTom
No, it would not do as a rule. Law is very intricate, and insurance assessing even more so.


Precisely. Its why we need god dam expensive lawyers to stand even a remote chance in court. If you have a legal issue to deal with, you will not be able to deal with it yourself unless you have good experience/training in legal stuff. Even then you would ideally be specialized in certain types of laws. Not a system I am happy with when one can't defend themselves in court, but this is another topic.
Reply 15
Original post by Laomedeia
Precisely. Its why we need god dam expensive lawyers to stand even a remote chance in court. If you have a legal issue to deal with, you will not be able to deal with it yourself unless you have good experience/training in legal stuff. Even then you would ideally be specialized in certain types of laws. Not a system I am happy with when one can't defend themselves in court, but this is another topic.


:facepalm:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending