Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Car insurance invalid for non essential journeys

48 replies

Papergirl1968 · 14/04/2020 14:26

Just heard “loophole lawyer” Nick Freeman being interviewed on local radio and he said some car insurers may not pay out in the event of a crash on a non essential journey.
I’ve googled and this has also been in some of the papers, again quoting Freeman (sorry, I can’t do links) but I thought I’d just let people know as I wasn’t aware.

OP posts:
MrsJoshNavidi · 14/04/2020 14:30

Interesting - but given that we should only be making essential journeys anyway, and not going on joy rides - I don't think it will make much difference in the current situation.

perniciousdot · 14/04/2020 14:30

It will be interesting to see how an insurance company can prove your journey was non essential. Anyone can say they were going to shop for 'X relative who is vulnerable'

jimmyhill · 14/04/2020 14:30

Bullshit

perniciousdot · 14/04/2020 14:32

Oh, and this guy is a prick. He doesn't speak for any insurance company. Unless my insurer change my policy then it's valid.

cologne4711 · 14/04/2020 14:36

Well if that is the case, it is a change to the terms of the insurance policy and they would have to write to all policy-holders to let them know, along with a cast iron definition of essential journey.

Not. Going. To, Happen.

He. Is. Talking. Out. Of. His. Bottom. (not for the first time)

user1492771818 · 14/04/2020 14:38

If you drove past a police road block, they were instructing you to stop and you then had to make a claim you wouldn't be covered, under normal circumstances. So disobeying lawful instruction to make only essential journeys could be viewed by the same.

Original poster
Papergirl1968 · 14/04/2020 15:15

He normally defends motorists so to say they could get caught out by this is not his usual style.
I do think it would be hard but not impossible for the insurers to prove whether it was an essential journey.

OP posts:
Thripp · 14/04/2020 15:17

Complete codswallop.

slipperywhensparticus · 14/04/2020 15:17

I pay my insurance there is nothing on the policy that says essential journeys only they cant just unilaterally change it to suit themselves

HuntIdeas · 14/04/2020 15:22

It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a clause in your policy saying legal journeys only. Seeing as non-essential journeys are illegal....

FliesandPies · 14/04/2020 15:22

Total bollocks - and scaremongering to boot.

FliesandPies · 14/04/2020 15:27

non-essential journeys are illegal....

No, they aren't, because 'non-essential' has not been defined in the regulations.

MrsJoshNavidi · 14/04/2020 17:48

It will be interesting to see how an insurance company can prove your journey was non essential. Anyone can say they were going to shop for 'X relative who is vulnerable'

I suppose it might be non essential if you were in a supermarket that isn't roughly on the direct route between your two houses.

Hirsutefirs · 14/04/2020 17:53

The lawyer would like for some dim cop to charge someone and somehow it gets to court, so he can get them off the non-offence.

BamboozledandBefuddled · 14/04/2020 17:58

Complete and utter bullshit. Firstly, there is no law defining an 'essential' journey. If there was, than as a pp said, new policy terms and conditions would need to be issued to every policyholder. There is no existing clause regarding 'legal journeys' as that is a concept completely unheard of in British law.

And you are not required to shop at a supermarket that is on a 'direct route' of any description. I think some people on here have been isolating for too long now....

LittleLittleLittle · 14/04/2020 17:58

@MrsJoshNavidi there are loads of supermarkets around me of different sizes and they don't all sell the same free from/vegetarian/vegan/low salt/etc products.

If I decided to drive to a supermarket 12 miles away rather than the one 3 miles away because they sold the right two products for someone with a particular dietary requirement required then how could my journey be non-essential?

WeBuiltCisCityOnSeeingSouls · 14/04/2020 17:58

Nick Freeman, for example...

PicsInRed · 14/04/2020 18:00

Unless they decrease my premiums to reflect the lowered risk of my car sitting idle on my driveway, they can fuck off that.

perniciousdot · 14/04/2020 18:02

I suppose it might be non essential if you were in a supermarket that isn't roughly on the direct route between your two houses.

You are allowed to go to whichever supermarket you choose. It doesn't have to be on a direct route.

MrsJoshNavidi · 14/04/2020 18:07

You are allowed to go to whichever supermarket you choose. It doesn't have to be on a direct route

No you're not. I wouldn't be able to justify travelling the 15 miles to the nearest Waitrose when there's a Sainsbury's a few streets away.

perniciousdot · 14/04/2020 18:11

No you're not. I wouldn't be able to justify travelling the 15 miles to the nearest Waitrose when there's a Sainsbury's a few streets away.

DD drives 10 miles to Tesco because we shop there. We have a co op down the road. We are allowed to go to Tesco. Stop making rules up that don't exist.

BamboozledandBefuddled · 14/04/2020 18:17

No you're not. I wouldn't be able to justify travelling the 15 miles to the nearest Waitrose when there's a Sainsbury's a few streets away.

You wouldn't need to 'justify' anything. The law defines leaving home to shop as essential. End of. Not when, where, how often or what you may or may not buy. Sorry if that spoils your dream of a police state but it's the truth.

Aragog · 14/04/2020 18:18

I wouldn't be able to justify travelling the 15 miles to the nearest Waitrose when there's a Sainsbury's a few streets away.

Can you find the part of the legal document put out by the Government which states this?

From what I remember 'essential' and 'non essential' has not been defined.

Just like the type of exercise and its duration each day has not been defined, despite what some MNetters would have us believe. There is also nothing in the legal statements that says you can't travel in a car to exercise either.

You are also still allowed to travel to work too, if you can't work from home. DH can mainly work from home but still needs to go in once of twice a week, and still needs to visit clients to deliver them documents and money - whilst socially distancing. MNetters would have us believe this is also non essential and not allowed, but it is.

It would be impossible to police and there is little way car insurance companies would prove that a journey was not essential in most cases.

topcat2014 · 14/04/2020 18:19

Think some pps are thinking of wartime rationing where you did have to go to your nearest nominated butcher etc

BamboozledandBefuddled · 14/04/2020 18:22

They probably are. They insist on comparing everything else to the bloody war!