Business Use Car Insurance

[Milkfloat]

Not being funny, but are you really sure about that ? ie that you've got your own motor insurance for your own car but the company has a completely seperate cover for your car whilst you are on company business ?

Yes, absolutely sure as many of us double checked. Our company insurance covers us for all cars as long as you have the owners permission. I have commuting cover on my car, but use the company cover for trips to the airport.

 

[Milkfloat]

You technically will be liable to tax on the cost of the insurance policy or on part of 45p per mile allowance as you are effectively being double compensated.

the 45p per mile allowance is including an allowance for extra insurance costs

That said, you would have had to have done something bad to upset the taxman for him to pursue you for the "benefit" you get in the circumstances you describe

Very true. I think I will raise it with the company, it looks like the UK employees could be paying a little extra on our insurance next year.

 

[spen666]

Very true. I think I will raise it with the company, it looks like the UK employees could be paying a little extra on our insurance next year.

The extra tax would be minimal and I personally wouldn't raise the issue as the tax man is unlikely to pursue it as the amount you would have to pay is negligible ie 25% of very little

 

[Milkfloat]

The extra tax would be minimal and I personally wouldn't raise the issue as the tax man is unlikely to pursue it as the amount you would have to pay is negligible ie 25% of very little

I think it is more the case that the company would want to be doing things by the book. So the insurance would technically cover us, but they will tell us to have our own coverage so hat we are not getting the benefit in kind. Even though my annual business mileage is less than 1000 miles, working out the insurance aspect for a P11D would be painful.

 

[Bromptonaut]

FFS

A prosecution for no insurance is a criminal case. All prosecutions are criminal cases.

Magistrates courts do not decide civil law cases

There's really no need to resort to the use of FFS. Apart from being generally uncivil it's against Shaun's request to keep this forum friendly.

Toffee's view that you're insured and that use outwith terms is a contractual matter is not unusual; I've seen it in other forums too.

I asked a simple question as to whether the contractual (civil) v prosecution (criminal) theory had been tested in a Superior Court. Your intervening reference to DPP v Whittaker goes at least some way to answering the question. Thank you.

And as somebody who served in the LCD and it's successors for 35 years I have a clear understanding of role of Mags v Civil Court.

 

[spen666]

There's really no need to resort to the use of FFS. Apart from being generally uncivil it's against Shaun's request to keep this forum friendly.

Toffee's view that you're insured and that use outwith terms is a contractual matter is not unusual; I've seen it in other forums too.

I asked a simple question as to whether the contractual (civil) v prosecution (criminal) theory had been tested in a Superior Court. Your intervening reference to DPP v Whittaker goes at least some way to answering the question. Thank you.

And as somebody who served in the LCD and it's successors for 35 years I have a clear understanding of role of Mags v Civil Court.

If you have spent 35 years in the LCD's department you have not learned very much have you? I wouldn't boast about 35 years in the LCD with such a complete misunderstanding of the basics of English Law. A prosecution is always a criminal matter.

 

[Bromptonaut]

If you have spent 35 years in the LCD's department you have not learned very much have you? I wouldn't boast about 35 years in the LCD with such a complete misunderstanding of the basics of English Law. A prosecution is always a criminal matter.

I'm not going to debate further with somebody who is (a) egregiously rude and (b) shows every sign of willfully misunderstanding posts in order to create/prolong argument.

 

[mjr]

If the police wanted to, they could ask what your journey is for or get some clues from what is in the car and decide to double-check. How deep they choose to dig will relate to what you were initially stopped/came into contact with plod for and whether you fail the attitude test I reckon.

"Attitude test" is a new euphemism for institutional discrimination! I reckon you'd best have your papers in order if you're not a posh white able man.

 

[mjr]

Not really. Posh white able men are just as likely to fail the attitude test...

Really? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35904025 suggests road policing discrimination on one axis but I suspect it on all the visible ones and no one's collecting the data to confirm or refute.

 

[Drago]

Not really. Posh white able men are just as likely to fail the attitude test...

More likely, in my experience.

 

[Profpointy]

Really? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35904025 suggests road policing discrimination on one axis but I suspect it on all the visible ones and no one's collecting the data to confirm or refute.

That may well be so, but the "attitude test" is something different.

In a completely non police incident a friend of mine was told "you can't come over here, we're filming" The speaker failed the attitude test and went away witha flea in his year. A 2nd individual tried "would you mind terribly if..." and found that much more productive

 

[mjr]

A motor trades person using a customer car to do their shopping I get.

But what of a car dealer?

Many moons ago, when I knew someone who drove on trade plates for a dealer, their policy didn't cover any personal/domestic use. If they didn't have paperwork showing they were transferring the car between sites, they could be caught like that.

I suspect they could stop at a supermarket en-route instead of a service station and pick up a little shopping while they're there anyway, but they'd be carrying it home afterwards if their private car wasn't at the destination (and it rarely would be) and it probably wouldn't be much shopping because I think they were put under some time pressure.

 

[screenman]

Here's something I didn't know until today....

View attachment 392032

A motor trades person using a customer car to do their shopping I get.

But what of a car dealer?

My traders policy covers me for social and domestic as well.

Now the use of trade plates is a different thing. In fact there is total confusion about where they must be placed nowadays.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Sort of back on topic, if my daughter can only claim 20ppm & does not pay tax due to only working part time how can she claim/recover the additional 25ppm?

 

[Slick]

Sort of back on topic, if my daughter can only claim 20ppm & does not pay tax due to only working part time how can she claim/recover the additional 25ppm?

She would fill in a tax return and claim it back by way of a rebate.