There is some kid i know (right barry boy) who claims to have found a loop hole in insuraning cars??
Firstly he has a old e reg fiesta in his garden that he insures 3rd party and pays the extra 2 be able 2 drive anyother car!
he then has a very modified tigra which is in his stepdads name and on his step dads traders policy!
Now he never drives the fiesta but ALLWAYS drives the tigra?? is this above borded as he thinks ??

surley it can be this easy as i have loads of mates who have traders policys and would be intrested if it is??

 

i was doing this 17 years ago when i got my first cossie when i was 18,insured an old metro fully comp,insured my old man for cossie,covered me to drive it,the filth were not happy but they couldnt do jack about it!

 

yes he can but...
He'll need to be over 25 and have fully comp on the fiesta then he will be insured 3rd party on any other car, but the 3rd party on any car is for emergency only and if he crashes any other car the insurance WILL investigate.

Ie who the car's registered to and when they drive it.
Insurance dont like people taking the piss

 

Were does is state this on the insurance papers cos ive looked and i cant find anything??? and trust me id love 2 make him look a mug!

He is only 20 and insuring the fiesta 3rd party but it does say on his papers he is insured 2 drive anyother car??
his insurance is with quinn??

 

Im sure this is technically insurance fraud.

I wasnt aware you could get another car driving on a 3rd party policy......

Plus im sure the wording in the policy will restrict your ability to drive another car in someone else name so you cant do it all the time

A simple observation by an insurance fraud investigator and you WILL get fucked

Im sure said barry boy will say "you cant prove nuffink bruv" well his step dad would have a hard time proving he paid for the car and mods and why he never drives it after simple investigation.

Also traders policys are for the trade...... so unless hes using it as a garage hack, or constantly on "test drives" im sure thats illegal too.

 

Im sure this is technically insurance fraud.

I wasnt aware you could get another car driving on a 3rd party policy......

Plus im sure the wording in the policy will restrict your ability to drive another car in someone else name so you cant do it all the time

A simple observation by an insurance fraud investigator and you WILL get fucked

Im sure said barry boy will say "you cant prove nuffink bruv" well his step dad would have a hard time proving he paid for the car and mods and why he never drives it after simple investigation.

Also traders policys are for the trade...... so unless hes using it as a garage hack, or constantly on "test drives" im sure thats illegal too.

 

I was allowed to drive other cars when under 25, was 3rd party too.
One or both of these may have changed, I know it changed for my brother from one year to next with same company, could have got caught out driving another car.


Is a way to do it, not best thing to do, but technically allowed I guess.
Like a lot of things, it's not what it states on your policy, it's what it DOESN'T state; they don't require your car to have an MOT for example, just to be roadworthy.

 

so this 20 year old reckons he's beating the system and is pulling a fast one over the insurance companies that know every dodge in the book?

 

mmmm anyone fancy putting his name and details in this thread then emailing a link to quinn wonder how long till his policy gets cancelled

 

i had 3rd party f&t with quin and i was also allowed to drive other cars

 

i used to be with quinn aswell mate and they said i was insured to drive other cars even tho i was only 3rd party.
i got pulled drivin a my mates rs1600i mk3 that he had just bought.and knew i wasnt covered so gave a false name but then they said i had no licence,so i admitted i wasnt insured,and gave my real details.they asked if i had an insurance policy on my own car and i did on my s2.they checked it out and it came back saying im insured to drive someone elses car.
luckily they let me go and didnt arrest me for giving false details.

 

why would you give false details if your insurer had already told you you were covered?

 

the part that gets me is fair anothe he is insured 2 drive other cars but surley there has 2 be somthing stoping him driving other cars all the time!
must be somthing that says it for short turm or emergancy use??

or am i wrong and its rearly a loop hole?

 

rickbartlett does it state you are insured to drive your mates cars 3rd party all the time though??? Im sure the specific wording on such a policy will limit it.

Besides the original posters mate is still committing insurance fraud as the car is his own not his dads and it is only registered in dads name to gain financial advantage via an insurance policy. Sure the DVLA would find an offence to charge him with. Hes knowingly falsly registered the vehicle rather than "forgot to update details"

Sure theres a number of offences hes committing if the police could be bothered to investigate

 

rickbartlett does it state you are insured to drive your mates cars 3rd party all the time though??? Im sure the specific wording on such a policy will limit it.

Besides the original posters mate is still committing insurance fraud as the car is his own not his dads and it is only registered in dads name to gain financial advantage via an insurance policy. Sure the DVLA would find an offence to charge him with. Hes knowingly falsly registered the vehicle rather than "forgot to update details"

Sure theres a number of offences hes committing if the police could be bothered to investigate

 

what he is doing is fraud and insurance companies will investigate and will make their own mind up as to whos car it really is

 

I expect it's what the policy doesn't state.
It says to drive other vehicles - they don't even need to be insured, doesn't say they do.
Never seen it say for X amount of miles, maybe in the small print, doubt it.

 

well if he was caught driving it surely he could say it was an 'emergency' of some kind and get away with it!?
as they would have no way to prove jhe drove the car all the time!?

 

Yep, it's what they can prove that counts, which is fuck all.
People getting their knickers in a twist with if's and but's, doesn't count for a thing really.

 

my policy doesnt say anything about only driving other cars in an emergencey but then im fully comp. it doesnt even so im only 3rd party on them but that "the policyholder may also drive in the uk any private motor car not owned hired or leased by him"

 

Well the only reason i know is i wanted 3rd party on any other car, so i can drive the rs as it's another 1100 pounds to put me on our lass's policy.
I bought the beemer and got that on my policy but i thought i'd phone and check all they said was 'yeah your insured on any car 3rd party only for emergency's' but they couldnt say what was deemed as an emergency.

But as you said it's not what's on the policy it's what isnt.

Possibly no mod's on 3rd party car's?

 

the owner of the car isnt always the one on the docs.

for instant, My mate brought his missus a car via his credit card but put it in here name, she dont own it, he does.

its fraud simple as, If he gets court then he'll get fucked up the ass. tell your mate he is a dick from me and should pay for insurance himself.

thats the people who put our insurance up

 

Surely he would say his dad owned it, as opposed to saying he owned it and getting in the shit, would this not be a wise move?

It's his dads car, he can drive it as he's insured to drive other cars.

I agree he's a dick, but proving other than the above I doubt is easy.

 

--------you will not get away with f---------all !!
put a 18 inch wiper on as a 17 inch replacment invalidates insurance!!!!
faulty side light invalidates insurance also-etc etc etc
insurance assessors you wont get past them m8
loopholes!!!!!!!!!!!>>>>>> you only think you have found one!
have a crash and test your theory-----ha-ha,
young drivers again aye!!!lol

 

The fact is hes committing fraud.

Proving it in a court of law is a different thing.

Its the moral principal in my eyes. Sure he might get away with it for a couple of police stops, but he will eventually get caught and if the insurance fraud people chose to investigate him hed get fucked.

By that same logic does it make it OK for paedophiles to rape children if they can get away with it because it cant be prooved??

Does it make daterape OK because its hard to proove???


When does breaking the law become ok or become morally wrong just because you can get away with it? where do you draw the line???

 

Bit of a myth all that.
If you crash, an inch too long wiper won't contribute/cause the crash, so makes no odds.
A side light out won't cause you to crash.
A big exhaust won't cause you to crash.
In event of a claim, a mod will usually cause them to charge you the amount this mod would have increased policy by.

 

insurance comanys can use anything from speed cams to speed trackers. they will figger it out and find that his son was driving the car as his own use, eather way hell be fucked over him or his dad

 

There you go then, answered it yourself.


Don't think kiddy fiddling can be compared to a little bit of a dodge on your insurance

 

Mine's exactly the same mate,
I'm also fully comp but it's when i rang they told me the emergency thing.

End of the day the insurance arnt daft they will have there arse's covered in kevlar in the eye's of the law.

 

why cant it be compared C4llyT??? the law is the law. If nobody had the potential to get hurt if it goes wrong then fine, it would just be himself at risk. (in the same way many car enthusiasts justify occasional speeding when the risk is mainly to themselves on empty roads), But thats not the case.

You make it sound like this is a victimless crime but its not. Young drivers have high insurance because most of them drive like cunts and cause high claims. How would you feel if said barry boy mowed down a bus stop of kids, one of which was your own, and the insurance didnt pay out??? Yes sure hed be personally liable for compensation but at like 10p a week for life

Hes a risk to everyone he meets on the road.

 

why cant it be compared C4llyT??? the law is the law. If nobody had the potential to get hurt if it goes wrong then fine, it would just be himself at risk. (in the same way many car enthusiasts justify occasional speeding when the risk is mainly to themselves on empty roads), But thats not the case.

You make it sound like this is a victimless crime but its not. Young drivers have high insurance because most of them drive like cunts and cause high claims. How would you feel if said barry boy mowed down a bus stop of kids, one of which was your own, and the insurance didnt pay out??? Yes sure hed be personally liable for compensation but at like 10p a week for life

Hes a risk to everyone he meets on the road.

 

mmm even the double posts are annoying me now

 

Not true at all, i sold a magnex back box to a lorry driver for his mondeo, he fitted it didnt inform his insurance.
He went to work parked his car in the yard then went on a job got back the next day after a night out, drove in the yard front end on his car caved in. Another bloke twated it accepted FULL LIABILITY and the guy had his own insurance cancelled for the back box.
He wasnt driving and the car was not even started he was 200ish mile's away.
He had to scrap the car and left fuck all, the insurance said if it hadnt been on private property he could of been liable. Work that fucker out!

 

my mate crashed his evo 8 then found his first mot was due 3 months previously. they paid out the £14000 value minus £50 for the mot test that he should have had done. his insurance wasnt invalidated.

 

Its not fraud atall and its perfectly legal. I actual spoke to a very good friend of mine about it. (he works in insurance)

And it is perfectly allowed. Unfortunately they will investigate any claim and also the car is not insured when parked up out and no one is in the car (unless his dad claims he was in it)

People have been doing this for donkeys years and as long as the car is insured and owned by someone other than youreself its perfectly legal...

Might get youre car impounded though if pulled over by essex police as they hate anyone that does it!!!!

 

Sounds nice
Just going off what a couple blokes who work in insurance have told me.
Would like to properly get to the bottom of it all, maybe it's not the same across the board, I don't know.
Stories like that and others you hear would indicate a non standard stereo could screw you up.

 

insurance is very rarely invalidated, they normally just do you another quote on the real description, ie points or mods.

The only time is if they wouldnt have insured you with the differences to the policy.

 

Remember you saying this before, not that many will believe it

 

So I wasn't far off the mark then?

 

he was sweating himself at the time as tesco are usually cunts for insurance but it was my business partner not just a random "mate" and a 100% true story.