Driving other vehicles third party

[-Ralph-]

YC's thread got me thinking....

Not related to bikes, but same principals apply so I'm going to post here and Mods please move if you deem necessary.

My car is insured by me with my wife as a named driver. I have third party entitlement to drive vehicles "not owned by and not leased to the policyholder, blah, blah, blah"

My wife's car is half owned by me through the virtues of marriage, but it is her car, we have paid the finance repayments from a joint account, but if we were to divorce she would take it without argument from me, just as I would take my car. It is currently registered to me, insured by me, with her named as the "main driver". She is on a French license with zero no claims so it WAS cheaper this way, but due to change in my circumstances this is no longer the case.

We intend to re-register the car in her name and insure it her name so she can start earning her own no-claims. It is 6 years old now and worth about £2K so for the first time since new we will only insure it third party.

I once found myself uninsured when she hit my car on the driveway. I could not claim as both policies were in my name and I could not claim against myself and be the first and third party. I was told even if my wife's car was insured in her name, I still could not claim as claiming against your wife was tantamount to claiming against yourself.

So my question is, do I have to be a named driver on my wifes third party policy, or can I just drive her car once a month using the third party entitlement on my insurance?

[Red Herring]

The driving the spouses vehicle on your 3rd party extension is quite a common occurance Ralph, and there is no definitive answer. You need to contact your insurance company and ask them directly if they will cover you under those circumstances.

[-Ralph-]

I once found myself uninsured when she hit my car on the driveway. I could not claim as both policies were in my name and I could not claim against myself and be the first and third party. I was told even if my wife's car was insured in her name, I still could not claim as claiming against your wife was tantamount to claiming against yourself.

Watch out for this one all you married folk. If you follow you partner somewhere, DON'T crash into the back of them as from my experience you are not covered.

[madness]

It's far too late for my brain to cope with this!

[Stu]

Would having you as a named driver make her insurance dearer or cheaper? :???:

[-Ralph-]

Would having you as a named driver make her insurance dearer or cheaper? :???:

More expensive, hence the question. I think Red Herring has already answered it with the most sensible reply (thanks :p), but I'd still be interested to other peoples experience/perspective or find out what other married folk do.

[carty]

Just transfer it to her name, write out a receipt for £1 which you both sign for sale of the vehicle, then you should be covered on your own policy as you clearly don't own or lease the vehicle- maybe get a witness to sign and date the receipt too?

[carty]

By the way, I've always driven my wife's car (registered and innsured in her name) on my third party entitlement. Never given a thought as to whether it may be technically illegal.

[rusty76]

Might be worth checking what the cost differences are. It's actually lessens the cost of my policy to include my wife as a named driver (with her stated as owning and insuring her own car). Fook knows how they work out that this reduces my premium but I'm not complaining, I guess statistically they recognise me a hen pecked wimp and therefore less of a insurance risk

[yorkie_chris]

+1
Did a quote for MYCs CG, for her TPO is £100. With me as named rider it is £80

[Dicky Ticker]

Often with two named drivers the premium is less due to the spread risk??????
My car is cheaper with the wife as second named driver and likewise on her policy with me named
A point of interest Ralph, as my wife had been a named driver on our original policy she was granted 60% NCB when we took the new policy for her out with the same company---------worth investigating,also the cost difference for her was minimal
between TPFT and F.COMP[About £18 if my memory serves me correctly]

[muffles]

I was told even if my wife's car was insured in her name, I still could not claim as claiming against your wife was tantamount to claiming against yourself.

Sounds a little odd, who are you claiming against when you claim on your own policy then? It's not the insurance company, obviously - otherwise that would be the case here (unless you were planning on suing your wife - sorry, you)...

[-Ralph-]

Sounds a little odd, who are you claiming against when you claim on your own policy then? It's not the insurance company, obviously - otherwise that would be the case here (unless you were planning on suing your wife - sorry, you)...

OK, I didn't explain that well. I wasn't "uninsured" as such but would have lost my no claims. If you claim on your own policy, you are claiming against yourself, but for that reason you are loosing your no claims, etc.

I could have claimed for the damage as I was fully comprehensive, but what I couldn't do is provide my insurance details for the other car as the third party to claim against. In that scenario I would be the first and third party. The reason for wanting to do this was the excess was a 4 times more on my car than it was on my wife's and it was my wife's fault, so I wanted to claim for it on that policy. I was TOLD (that doesn't mean it's right!) that I wouldn't be able to name my wife as the third party either, even if she did have her own policy, as we were married I couldn't claim against her.

[muffles]

OK, I didn't explain that well. I wasn't "uninsured" as such but would have lost my no claims. If you claim on your own policy, you are claiming against yourself, but for that reason you are loosing your no claims, etc.

I could have claimed for the damage as I was fully comprehensive, but what I couldn't do is provide my insurance details for the other car as the third party to claim against. In that scenario I would be the first and third party. The reason for wanting to do this was the excess was a 4 times more on my car than it was on my wife's and it was my wife's fault, so I wanted to claim for it on that policy. I was TOLD (that doesn't mean it's right!) that I wouldn't be able to name my wife as the third party either, even if she did have her own policy, as we were married I couldn't claim against her.

Ah, ok got it - that makes sense (well the bit about claiming against yourself :lol:). I'm surprised about the wife thing but who knows with insurance companies eh!