I've just got a renewal quote for the 110, £103 fully comp which includes driving other vehicles. All good I thought except the bloke on the phone said 'excluding bikes and vans'. I can fully understand motorbikes but I asked about vans and he said any commercial vehicles which includes vans that are classed as commercial vehicles.

Now my Dad has 2 vans, one for work and the other for pleasure, both if which I have driven thinking I was insured, but it seems I was wrong. So I asked what the classing means which he replied by saying that the vehicle class would have to have been changed on the log book, usually after having the vehicle modified, seats fitted, windows put in etc. I used to only own a van a few years ago and I insured it as a personal vehicle as it wasn't a commercial thing it was used for. I am in IT and only used it for social, domestic, pleasure and commuting and I never changed the class. And there is someone where I work who also runs a van as it's convenient for her to have a van as she owns 4 dogs. I recently drove her van to see if I could figure out her turbo issue, again thinking I was insured on my policy, which it would seem I wasn't as she hasn't changed her vehicle class either.

So, is this all a load of bollocks or have I indeed been driving vehicles without insurance? Surely these persons who's vans I have driven are also not insured correctly?

I am pleased with everything else about the insurance quote, but this troubles me. The quote was from Adrian Flux.

Have a look at the policy document. I once owned a transit van that was HGV taxation class and I had to visit dvla office to renew disc (20 years ago). All I have owned since were plg. So I don't get how they define a commercial vehicle - use for business purposes, hire or reward?

the class of vehicle and the use of the vehicle are two separate issues.

depends entirely on the insurance company as to how they approach it.

the class of vehicle is as per the log book, may be wrong or right, but that's what it is based on

likewise for the use, depends on what the policy holder requests. I too have had vans on a SDP policy, and cars on a business policy.

the reasons may be many fold and varied. These are only suggestions, so don't crucify me, I don't understand how it works at all, just make sure that I have the cover I need in each case.

For example, someone used to driving a car with windows all round may struggle with the limited visibility that a van provides and would therefore be more likely to have an accident, or the person with use of a van may be more likely to use this for business use and so on. The person with a car may be unused to the potentially higher weight that a van could be loaded too and underestimate the handling and braking.

don't know the answers, just know some of the possible reasons.

One insurer tried to increase my premium because I had deadlocks fitted to the load area of my van. When I argued that it would make it more secure and less likely to be broken into, their response was it would cost them more to repair or reinstate if it was stolen or damaged.

I totally understand, but I just wasn't aware. I just presumed that if a van was insured by the other person for non-commercial use then I would have thought that it would be classed as a car and therefore I would be able to drive it.