www.boxertrix.com

Apparently that's the way it works, but as I tried to argue with my car insurance Co........
"Since I am the named driver, anyone else driving it - would be uninsured, and if stopped by the police and insurance checked - they would get prosecuted for driving whilst uninsured!"

Apparently there is still some 3rd party liability.

The insurance Co charges for canceling the policy, which if almost done ....can cost you additional money........

Grrrrrrrr!

Al

I'd just copied the very same link to post a thread here. Yes, seems ridiculous. So we need to be very careful to cancel insurance immediately on the sale of a bike, and get new road tax on buying a new vehicle (non-transferable road tax is a change coming in next month).

This one seems very serious though. Being a law abiding citizen doesn't help you here.

So if some scally nicks your vehicle and kills someone by their piss poor driving, as it's insured does that mean now that your insurance is going to have to cough ?? Seems about as illogical as the original premise.

And Al I totally agree, it's you that's insured to use a particular vehicle. Once it's sold it's no longer your property so how can you authorise any usage of it.

Blackal wrote:The insurance Co charges for canceling the policy, which if almost done ....can cost you additional money........

Grrrrrrrr!

Al

When I sold my last bike, I did exactly this. I had a month left to run and just left it because I knew that with Bennet's rip-off charges (£25) to cancel my policy I'd end up paying them so I just let it run out. Given that Jockland has some weird and wonderful legal rules I wonder if this scenario applies to England.

Had heard of this previously and it is very frustrating - effectively it means adding this into the price of any second hand sale.

andy griff wrote:Had heard of this previously and it is very frustrating - effectively it means adding this into the price of any second hand sale.

I don't mind paying for a service but I get royally pissed off at some of the stupid charges ins companies are stinging people for nowadays. One of the worst is Devitts and a quick google throws up some proper horror stories. One poor bloke ended up paying £140 to cancel his policy. God knows how but there you go:

http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews86589.html

I wonder if a letter you got signed by the new owner stating that they have not been given permission by you to ride the bike on your insurance would effectively negate any potential case the insurance company may have against you?

The law is not always justice and the rules are just black and white so small print becomes very important some times.

Hope he fights it.

Stroke B,

IMHO - I don't think so. The issue appears to be that the vehicle is insured third party and therefore covers risks in that category until cancelled.

There's a thread running on PH about this, one of the posters is a bona fide lawyer. Worth a read: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topi ... mid=412805