PeterE wrote:
Lum wrote:
On a related note, insurers always ask if you have any points or convictions in the last 5 years, but from what I can tell, speeding points only last for 4 years after which point they are considered "spent"
Does the rehabilitation of offenders act come into play here, whereby spent convictions don't count and you are not obliged to give them that information?
The normal cut-off point for minor offences under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is five years, so the question is in line with that.
The big anomaly is in drink-driving offences, which stay on your licence for eleven years, but are officially "spent" after five.
Incidentally, there was a lot of criticial comment about Norwich Union's decision to withdraw the "driving other cars" clause in the
Sunday Times today. They may find it is bad publicity. I certainly wouldn't insure with them after that, although on several occasions in the past few years they have given me totally uncompetitive quotes anyway.
Another point to watch is insurers removing comprehensive cover if the driver was committing certain driving offences at the time of the crash.
Correct Peter.
The NU was also criticies in the Sunday Express over these decisions.
AA Insurance has warned that the NU policy will backfire and lead to an increase in uninsured driving. NU justifies its decision to remove DOC clauses from fullyu comp policies because drivers were abusing the privilege and inusring a cheap car and then using the third party perk to drive an expensive model
However, the AA warns that drivers may not realise the DOC clause has been struck off their policies and continue to use the perk "in ignorance or necessity" leaving themselves open to prosecution. The AA reminds that fully comp drivers have enjoyed this privilege for many years and will assume they still benefit from this perk of fully comp cover. (If this is removed - perhaps the premium will be reduced? It should be as there is LESS cover than previously but hell will freeze over before such a consideration is given to customers - no doubt!

)
The AA who have no plans to remove DOC warns that the removal of DOC will worsen the situation. (All ANPR does in reality

is tell us the legal doc situation from a data base and it could be a fully comp driver on third party behind the wheel - which is why I suggest keeping a photocopy of the policy with you and fethch the original on a producer

) Could be that insurance will be car and not person in the future per EU requirements - and a separate policy to cover the driver. All money making of course.....for someone....
NU spokesman is reported:
NU spokesman wrote:
We will make our changes clear to customers. This is not a change which will occur overnight.

The cover only changes at renewal and all our call centres will tell the customers that their cover has changed. We are not forcing anything on anyone.

We will take a compassionate view of emergencies"
The last two sentences don't make much sense to me. If a person cannot obtain third party DOC cover on a fully comp plicy as NU have phased it out - then I think the change has been "forced" on customers here.
And how does an insurance company take a compassionate view of an emergency whereby person drove a car without insurance? That is not even down to us - we have to refer to CPS and it's then up to the Mags or higher court to show "compassion"
And how the hell do you foresee an "emergency"? An emergency is an unforeseen or suden occurrence - of a danger of somethng requiring immediate action and a snap decision
