# Price of insurance



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Decided to buy a Black Cab to enable the wife to travel easier in her wheelchair, just push her straight in from the kerb side with ramp, no wondering if access from the rear when you return to the parked vehicle and find some nob head bumper to bumper.

If she is having a good day then the nearside seat swings round for her to sit on and be swung back in.I will also have a seat fitted in the front as well.

Well that was the plan, until they gave me an insurance quote of over £1000. Have to go down the classic car route I think.This is more than I paid for the cab.>>

cabby


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

Try Adrian Flux, very cheap on classic insurance with limited mileage.


----------



## Harrers (Dec 21, 2011)

Maybe they quoted for a "Hire and Reward" policy?


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

try:


2getherinsurance.co.uk


You might have a pleasant surprise


tony


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Thanks will have to wait till Tuesday now, but will try them.
No Harrriers, Am too old for a Taxi insurance,:frown2::frown2: this was for a third party, social use ,me only driving, under 3000 miles.
Go compare and Tesco do not cover a London cab, not even on their list.

cabby


----------



## Ozzyjohn (Sep 3, 2007)

+1 for Adrian Flux - they take time to clearly understand your needs and quote accordingly (and sensibly) - they reference the sort of requirement you have in the final paragraph https://www.adrianflux.co.uk/black-cab-insurance/ .

Regards,
John


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Cabby

You are going to need a specialist broker I think. The problem you have is almost certainly that any internet based insurer will use a vehicle database to give you a quote. If they input Black Cab they will get a quote for "hire and reward" 'cos that's what black cabs are used for. Very few are used as private vehicles so the database doesn't have that as an option.

It's telephone around time for you!!

Andy


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Thank you for all the pointers and suggestions.None of the online were of any help, unfortunately Mr.Flux insists on a 20 year rule, without brexit,I really do not want a 20 year old cab, they were noisy and not much better than the old pre great war vehicles on the road.
Will try plodds ideanext, that is if I can find any brokers still in the job, as most are tied into companies now.

I can get Third party for a smidgen over £1k. I can get a cab for half that.:surprise::surprise:

cabby


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

cabby said:


> Thank you for all the pointers and suggestions.None of the online were of any help, unfortunately *Mr.Flux insists on a 20 year rule*, without brexit,I really do not want a 20 year old cab, they were noisy and not much better than the old pre great war vehicles on the road.
> Will try plodds ideanext, that is if I can find any brokers still in the job, as most are tied into companies now.
> 
> I can get Third party for a smidgen over £1k. I can get a cab for half that.:surprise::surprise:
> ...


Thats a bit odd Cabby as they even have a page about them here. https://www.adrianflux.co.uk/blog/2015/08/buying-a-black-cab-as-a-private-car.html

Quote
_*
Cheap insurance - it's true that most insurers will struggle to know what to rate your FX4 or TX1, it's unlikely to appear in computerised listing of car makes and models used on comparison websites but, once you've identified a specialist broker like Adrian Flux, insurance costs can be much lower than many current people carriers on the market.

*_The photo in the article is a 55 reg as well. Maybe you should call them back and reference that page and ask them WTF they are talking about.


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

Now I stand to be corrected however I believe that you can drive another vehicle on your own vehicle insurance *without the other vehicle having its own insurance*, unless your insurance has specific caveats that you cant do this.

You would only have 3rd party cover.

It may also be that the vehicle needs to be in someone else's name for you to do this (otherwise we would all be at it) so perhaps a family member or friend can register the cab in their name?

I am a member of a motoring forum and this info was provided by an insurance underwriter.

PM me if you want me to specifically check with him regarding your situation Cabby

Graham :smile2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

GMJ said:


> Now I stand to be corrected however I believe that you can drive another vehicle on your own vehicle insurance *without the other vehicle having its own insurance*, unless your insurance has specific caveats that you cant do this.
> 
> You would only have 3rd party cover.


The "drive other cars not owned etc." clause on SOME insurance policies only applies where the car in question is already insured by another party, it doesn't cover any vehicle that has no insurance at all. You're correct about the 3rd party (or even "RTA only") cover when using this clause though.

This subject was covered at length some time ago on this forum.


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

gaspode said:


> The "drive other cars not owned etc." clause on *SOME* insurance policies only applies where the car in question is already insured by another party, it doesn't cover any vehicle that has no insurance at all. You're correct about the 3rd party (or even "RTA only") cover when using this clause though.


The key word is "some" policies. It depends on Cabby's policy or perhaps it would be worth him changing policy to get one on another vehicle that does allow this.

I believe that the principle is still correct: the vehicle in question (the black cab) does not need its own insurance and as long as the black cab isn't owned, leased or hired by Cabby he should be OK.

The key is to check the existing policy and to ensure that the black cab isn't owned/registered to him (NB as we are aware 'owned' and 'registered' are two different things)

Graham :smile2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

GMJ said:


> I believe that the principle is still correct: the vehicle in question (the black cab) does not need its own insurance and as long as the black cab isn't owned, leased or hired by Cabby he should be OK.


I'm afraid you're entirely wrong Graham.

If it was the case that the driven car didn't require to be insured "in it's own right" can you imagine all the low-life schemes that would proliferate?

I think MrPlodd might have something to say on this one. :wink2:


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

I'll stand my ground on this but not bother to debate it anymore. 

Cabby: my contact runs the service desk for a very large insurance company. If you PM me I can contact him - he will confirm

Cheers

Graham :smile2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

GMJ said:


> I'll stand my ground on this but not bother to debate it anymore.


Fair enough, but disturbing that any representative of a major insurer should make such a statement (unless of course that statement was made prior to 2011 when the "Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE) regulations" came into effect). Prior to this legislation there was endless argument about the situation where a driver uses his own comprehensive insurance to provide 3rd party cover when driving uninsured vehicles.

Since 2011 the position is very clear as it has been compulsory for all vehicles to be "continuously insured" by the car owner unless SORNed. If a car is SORNed then obviously the vehicle cannot legally be driven on a public road anyway so the question of whether the "drive any other car" covers you or not doesn't arise. There are some exceptions to the SORN rules such as when driving to and from a pre-arranged MOT test or for motor traders using "trade plates".

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-insurance/uninsured-vehicles
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/blog/new-car-insurance-laws-explained/


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Well my insurance policy does allow me to drive other vehicles TP only.

I was under the impression that any vehicle should not be on the road without insurance.So in theory I should be able to drive any vehicle that is not Sorned.

I have considered putting the Taxi in my Sons name and getting him to insure it at my cost.Depending on the cost.

cabby


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Surely if a vehicle is driven around these days without an insurance policy on it it will flag up everytime its clocked by an ANPR camera and how would you tax it?


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

Everything you folks say is logical. I have emailed my chap so I'll let you know what he says.

Graham :smile2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

cabby said:


> I have considered putting the Taxi in my Sons name and getting him to insure it at my cost.Depending on the cost.
> 
> cabby


I'm not sure how that would help, is it an age thing?

A specialist broker local to you (Hove) who might be worth trying is Peter S Taylor, they insured my classic for many years and were usually very helpful.

https://www.bishopcalway.co.uk/#


----------



## emmbeedee (Oct 31, 2008)

cabby said:


> I can get Third party for a smidgen over £1k. I can get a cab for half that.:surprise::surprise:
> cabby


Did you get quotes for full comp as well? I understand that some companies quote more for TP than full comp. Sounds crazy but worth checking out.


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

OK, my chap has responded and I have quoted his text in full below. The upshot is that you can do as I suggest however you risk a £100 non-endorseable fine for driving a car without tax (which does not invalidate your insurance btw...

_This is a minefield

DOC has several standard exclusions and aspects

1. Cover is limited to third party cover only. There are some high net worth polices that provide fully comp eg Zurich Private a clients, but not mainstream. Adrian Flux will in some cases sell an additional bolt on policy that increases cover to Fully comp

2. Anyone under 25 is excluded. 25 is normally defined by your age when the policy was taken out, not by your actual age when you drive. Very rare exclusions allow this to drop to 21

3. Any vehicle owned, leased or rented by you is always excluded. Sometimes this extends to any of the above by your spouse or partner too

4. Some policies insist on the other car being insured e.g. Esure, some don't insist on it at all e.g. Direct Line. Of course if the other car isn't insured then it won't be taxed and you will be driving an untaxed car. However, the penalty for that is a non-endorseable £100 fixed penalty normally. Tax has no bearing on whether you are insured or not.

Hope this helps_

So yes you can do it but there are risks. It depends on how you view risk I guess. Its purely a personal choice/matter really.

Cabby - I'm happy to field anymore PM's if you want to fire any questions through to see if I can clarify any more but I guess that the best way forward would obviously be to try a more mainstream route (or if you don't, then don't post on here about it :smile2

Graham :smile2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

GMJ said:


> OK, my chap has responded and I have quoted his text in full below. The upshot is that you can do as I suggest however you risk a £100 non-endorseable fine for driving a car without tax (which does not invalidate your insurance btw...


Ah - OK, so your "expert" suggests that you can do it (on some selected insurance policies) providing you are happy with knowingly and deliberately committing an offence? He's also happy to state categorically that using this ploy will not invalidate your insurance.

What a plonker.

BTW: If he really does work for a UK insurance company he'll be sacked if his employers find out that he's proposing that their clients behave in this manner.


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

gaspode said:


> Ah - OK, so your "expert" suggests that you can do it (on some selected insurance policies) providing you are happy with knowingly and deliberately committing an offence? He's also happy to state categorically that using this ploy will not invalidate your insurance.
> 
> What a plonker.
> 
> BTW: If he really does work for a UK insurance company he'll be sacked if his employers find out that he's proposing that their clients behave in this manner.


Any reason to be rude really?

Graham :frown2:


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

Just to clarify Gaspodes rather rude offering:-

- At no stage did I use the word expert so I am not sure who he is quoting when he uses quotation marks around the word "expert". I guess its just to try and ridicule/belittle.

- Have you met him? No...so how is he a plonker then? Physician heal thyself...

- "...If he really does work for a UK insurance company"...so are you saying I am lying and made him up? Really?

- "...he'll be sacked if his employers find out that he's proposing that their clients behave in this manner. " *RE READ HIS EMAIL TO ME*... *where is he proposing anything?* He is answering a question I asked and not giving any guidance as to how to proceed.

So, now we are passed this, all I have done is provide an alternative view to the ones provided. Driving the vehicle without it having insurance is valid however there are risks. No one is suggesting that anyone should do this and Cabby is no doubt a sensible chap who will decide what he wants to do once he has looked at all the options.

But really Gaspode...do try and play nice there's a good chap :wink2:

Graham :smile2:


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

GMJ said:


> OK, my chap has responded .........
> 
> ............
> 3. Any vehicle owned, leased or rented by you is always excluded. Sometimes this extends to any of the above by your spouse or partner too


There's the killer. Plus even if you could show that you're covered for another vehicle it won't show on the database which the Police use so you could expect to be stopped and detained while it was all cleared up, probably frequently.

I've read about cases of cars having been impounded for a few days because Insurers were slow to add new policies or renewals to the database. Not worth the bother I think.


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

The choice has been made. My Son will buy the taxi, he will insure and tax it,( I am paying of course). As he is short of parking space I shall be nice and keep it out of his way over here, this of course means that I am able to drive it on my own policy.I would have got me put on his new policy but it would up the price too much.


cabby

More than one way to skin a cat.:wink2::wink2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

cabby said:


> The choice has been made. My Son will buy the taxi, he will insure and tax it,( I am paying of course). As he is short of parking space I shall be nice and keep it out of his way over here, this of course means that I am able to drive it on my own policy.I would have got me put on his new policy but it would up the price too much.


I hate to point this out cabby but.....................

Unless your son declares the correct address where the vehicle is to be kept overnight together with the identity of the main and any intended additional drivers then he is witholding information that is relevent to the calculation of the applicable premium. He is therefore making a fraudulent proposal.

If you really intend going ahead with this scheme I would also suggest that it's not really a very good idea to post your intentions on a public forum, you never can tell who's reading this thread. :wink2:


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

GMJ said:


> But really Gaspode...do try and play nice there's a good chap :wink2:
> 
> Graham :smile2:


Hi Graham
I really do apologise if I caused you any offence - none is intended, I simply wish to ensure that no members reading this thread are misled into following the path suggested by your advisor, whether he's an "expert" or (as you initially declared) an "insurance underwriter".

I've spent 35 years working alongside insurance underwriters and I can assure you that none of them would ever be offended at being called an expert, whether in quotation marks or not. :grin2:
I can also tell you that no underwriter I've ever known would ever suggest any path of action that involved committing an offence.

The crux of the matter is that the advice conveyed by you (no doubt in all innocence) from your source is wrong and potentially illegal if followed.


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Cabby. Did you actually call back Adrian Flux and point out the contents of their advert I posted showing cabs for private use well under 20 years old?

Take it higher than just the first person at the call centre. I think I would rather do it legit that what your proposing.


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

I will do barry in the morning, thinking about it, I may have mislead them in asking about classic car insurance in error.

As to your points Gaspode,which are good ones, providing the location of where the vehicle will be securely parked in either of two places overnight, to facilitate cleaning and general maintenance is declared, this will be acceptable.As he will be the owner, also the policy holder, the main place where vehicle is kept will be his. So there is no deception incurred.

However this will only be if all else fails.I have now managed to find cover, but I am trying to get it cheaper, so will try barryd idea again.

cabby


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

Pardon me if I'm pointing out the obvious to an ex-taxi driver, but I assume you've already tried Tradex?

http://www.tradex.com/


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Thank you gaspode, but they are more expensive than Westminster, another trade insurance for taxis.They cannot understand that you do NOT want cover for a working vehicle.

The easiest method is to have the vehicle licensed as a Private Hire for weddings, restricted use and a proper insurance, however I am not able to obtain a cabby licence for this either now.Plus the cost,,, phew.

cabby


----------



## gaspode (May 9, 2005)

It's beginning to sound as if it would be easier to put a bed and cooker in the back and re-register it as a motorhome. :grin2::grin2::grin2:


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

You forgot the fridge.:wink2::wink2:but that normally fits up front.

cabby


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Cabby

My view on this is that the pair of you will on very thin ice if you proceed. It is a serious offence to make a "False declaration to obtain insurance" 

When taking out insurance your are asked a number of questions such as. Who owns the vehicle? (Not necessarily the registered keeper of course) who will be the MAIN driver? That's the one you will possibly fall foul of, alongside "Where will the vehicle be NORMALLY kept"?

Insurance companies term this course of action as "Fronting" it was a common practice some years ago where parents would insure "their" car with a child being a "named" driver to keep the premiums down. They always prosecute anyone they find fronting as there has been a "false declaration to obtain insurance" which is illegal and carries a hefty penalty (and possible disqualification, it's viewed as being that serious) 

just be sure you are aware of the possible consequences FIRST.

Andy


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

gaspode said:


> Hi Graham
> I really do apologise if I caused you any offence - none is intended, I simply wish to ensure that no members reading this thread are misled into following the path suggested by your advisor, whether he's an "expert" or (as you initially declared) an "insurance underwriter".
> 
> I've spent 35 years working alongside insurance underwriters and I can assure you that none of them would ever be offended at being called an expert, whether in quotation marks or not. :grin2:
> ...


Apology accepted :smile2:

However...once again please re-read what I wrote. His not suggesting or recommending any path: he is merely answering a question that was asked of him. I did not ask him if he would recommend this: I asked him to clarify if it could be done. He did this and pointed out that it could/would result in a fine for non tax.

It is an important distinction to make; and both he and I went to great pains to point out the risks regarding keeping a non taxed vehicle.

Graham :smile2:


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Thank you all for pointing out the perils of insurance, some of my comments were meant to be light hearted.
I finished up emailing the fringes of our family to get professional advice, we just about cover every subject, or seems like it,:wink2:
It is not something I like doing too often.


cabby


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Thanks to posts on this subject, it turned out that Adrian Flux was the best deal for my London Taxi quoting a price for Fully comp.+ etc at the same price others were offering TPFT.But better than the trade offered me as well.
So I am now the owner of a Black Cab...again..:surprise::surprise: But regular work transporting the same passenger(SWMBO) and I can turn the intercom OFF.

cabby


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Did you renegotiate with them then or what?


----------



## Harrers (Dec 21, 2011)

cabby said:


> Thanks to posts on this subject, it turned out that Adrian Flux was the best deal for my London Taxi quoting a price for Fully comp.+ etc at the same price others were offering TPFT.But better than the trade offered me as well.
> So I am now the owner of a Black Cab...again..:surprise::surprise: But regular work transporting the same passenger(SWMBO) and I can turn the intercom OFF.
> 
> cabby


I am so pleased to hear that you got your insurance sorted. I hope that the final figure was somewhere near what the ultimate risk would indicate that it should be! I have insured with Adrian Flux in the past and found them to be reasonable.


----------

