car insurance and ownership

[peterpiper]

a colleague has an outstanding debt/ccj. He uses a company car parked on the driveway but the
insurance is in his name. Can an EO seize the vehicle on the basis of the name on the insurance
certificate ?

[efpom]

If the car is owned by a company, rather than by your colleague, the enforcement officer cannot seize it to satisfy a personal debt incurred by your colleague.

However, the fact that the insurance policy for the vehicle is in your colleague's name, rather than the company's name, is 'prime facie' evidence that the car is owned by your colleague, rather than the company. That, in my view would be enough to lawfully seize the vehicle.

If it turns out that your colleague does not, in fact, have have an insurable interest in the vehicle, that state of affairs voids any insurance policy obtained by your colleague,

If he represented to the insurer that he was the owner of the car, he commits an offence under the Fraud Act 2006.

Your colleague. via yourself, might wish to clarify what is his insurable interest in the car.

[peterpiper]

If the car is owned by a company, rather than by your colleague, the enforcement officer cannot seize it to satisfy a personal debt incurred by your colleague.

However, the fact that the insurance policy for the vehicle is in your colleague's name, rather than the company's name, is 'prime facie' evidence that the car is owned by your colleague, rather than the company. That, in my view would be enough to lawfully seize the vehicle.

If it turns out that your colleague does not, in fact, have have an insurable interest in the vehicle, that state of affairs voids any insurance policy obtained by your colleague,

If he represented to the insurer that he was the owner of the car, he commits an offence under the Fraud Act 2006.

Your colleague. via yourself, might wish to clarify what is his insurable interest in the car.

I clarified with colleague who said that he did not state to the insurer that he was the owner of the vehicle. He said he was told that to drive the car he had to be personally insured. He said that the car he has will be changed to another one when another colleague returns

[peterpiper]

I clarified with colleague who said that he did not state to the insurer that he was the owner of the vehicle. He said he was told that to drive the car he had to be personally insured. He said that the car he has will be changed to another one when another colleague returns

We missed this
Your colleague. via yourself, might wish to clarify what is his insurable interest in the car.
His only interest is that he is allowed to drive the car whilst he is employed

[efpom]

On what date was the car seized?

[des8]

Anyone driving a car has insurable interest in so far as he must have third party liability.
Also if loaned a vehicle, privately or as part of his employment, there could be insurable interest if part of the agreement is that he is responsible for any damage he causes to the vehicle.
Firms often supply vehicles to employees, either because they are required for work purposes or as a "perk" and require the employee to effect full comprehensive insurance.
There is no problem as long as the insurers are informed of the situation.

Until the recent death of a friend I had full comp insurance in my own name to drive his car.
He had had his licence revoked due to health concerns and so was unable to obtain an insurance policy to which I could be added

[peterpiper]

On what date was the car seized?

Car has not been seized. Colleague raised or asked if there was a possibility that it could be seized
based on the parameters stated in the original post ie: company car with private insurance whilst
employed to do a job of work

[peterpiper]

Anyone driving a car has insurable interest in so far as he must have third party liability.
Also if loaned a vehicle, privately or as part of his employment, there could be insurable interest if part of the agreement is that he is responsible for any damage he causes to the vehicle.
Firms often supply vehicles to employees, either because they are required for work purposes or as a "perk" and require the employee to effect full comprehensive insurance.
There is no problem as long as the insurers are informed of the situation.

Until the recent death of a friend I had full comp insurance in my own name to drive his car.
He had had his licence revoked due to health concerns and so was unable to obtain an insurance policy to which I could be added

Sorry to hear about the death of your friend.
How does your opinion fit with that given by EFPOM ?

[des8]

I don't think anything I posted contradicts efpom 's post.

He suggested that IF there was no insurable interest, or IF he represented to the insurers that he was the owner then certain things follow, with which I agree
All I said was that it was not necessary to own the car to have insurable interest, and thus it is possible to obtain insurance.

Remember that the driver of a hire car does not own it, but has insurable interest and thus can insure it.
Cars purchased on HP are owned by the finance company, and yet are insured by the registered keepers.

Insurance certificates are no more evidence of ownership than the V5 form issued by the DVLA