February 2007

Biba Seeks 'Driving Other Cars' Clarity
Biba has urged insurers to make the scope of cover provided by "driving other cars" (DOC) extensions to be made clearer. The broker body said the extensions needed to be "tidied up and brought up to date", as consumers did not understand the cover provided. This left them at risk of unintentionally driving without insurance.

A Biba spokesperson said there were inconsistencies between different insurers' DOC clauses. Some insurers required the vehicle being driven under a DOC extension to be insured, but others did not. The type of cover was also inconsistent, with some DOC causes providing comprehensive cover, but others giving only third party, fire and theft protection.

Another example was that some DOC clauses did not provide cover abroad. "Consumers need to understand the extension better. The clause needs to provide basic protection to the policyholder". "It is an important clause and we want it to stay, but it needs to be tidied up and brought up to date" Biba said. But a spokesperson for the ABI said it would be difficult to standardise the DOC wording. "It is a competitive issue."

Biba's call came as the ABI announced that a new model wording to close a loophole in the DOC extension had been approved. The voluntary wording is aimed at preventing the DOC extension being used to collect vehicles seized for not being insured. It is designed to appear on motor insurance certificates.