Safe Speed Forums

Depends what you mean by "adequate insurance". The typical comprehensive policy only covers damages to your own vehicle not damage to another vehicle that you are permitted to drive under the policy.


That can't be right in respect of third part insurance as the car is not able to take out a policy. Do you mean that the owner or keeper of the car must insure anyone to drive it.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

In France, the car is insured by the owner for any driver - and the car has to display a sticker denoting that this has been done - along with the "control technique" (MOT).

Any car without one would be quickly reported!

They also operate automatic renewal of insurance, which means you have to give two months notice if you wish to change insurers for an existing policy.
Once taken out, a policy cannot be canceled - only transferred!

In return, drivers get cheaper and better cover than in the UK.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Correct (from what I've seen); that doen't mean it isn't adequate. I believe 'Third Party' is the minimum (legally). I guess it is all about ensuring innocent parties can be compensated.


I'm not sure how that system worked; I'll try to find out.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Yes. Which is also why you can't have an excess on the third party part of the insurance. I understand that if you "post a bond" (whatever that means) in the sum of £10^7 you don't need to have third party insurance.


I would be interested to know. Because allowing anyone to drive the car would have a serious impact on premiums.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

This looks like another one of those cases where some body has invented a new device and now needs to find an application for it.

[anorak mode]
Actually it's £500,000 posted with the Accountant General of the Supreme Court. There are other exemptions to the requirement for 3rd party insurance, as proscribed by the RTA
[/anorak]

Which was the system used by a lot of parts of the old civil service/Departments OF THE crown ,I believe ( the Post Office was one of them) .And don't come to think of it -don't recollect there being road tax discs on the vans either .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Does anyone really think his camera is being considered?

Erm, has anyone else noticed the bizarre use of the phrase "over-speeding" in the article?


Haven't we seen this phrase a couple of times on this forum?

But NEVER with reference to the safe one ,possibly because the safe one can only truly be calculated by the driver at the time .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on