Car insurance /eyesight question

O

owm1

Registered User
Messages
8
Question about car insurance/eyesight.
Male early 60's (Full clean Irish licence).
Both licence and car insurance due for renewal. Eyesight in one eye very good (with light prescription glasses ) the other eye very bad.
Q: How do insurance companies deal with this . Will he have to pay more for his insurance. Car is for personal use.

Will he get his eye test done with his Gp.
Thanks.
 
An applicant for a class one licence can drive with only one eye. (As long as there is no issue with acuity or peripheral vision)

I don't recall being asked on insurance renewal about vision requirements.
 
if it's notifiable to the driving licences authority then its notifiable to the insurance company.
 
If it's a renewal he may not need an eye test. A gp or an optometrist can carry out an eyetest for a driving report. If his good eye meets the driving standards then he will be covered by nsurance. It's possible to meet the standards with good eyesight in one eye.
 
A relative of mine lost an eye in a car accident decades ago. But continues to drive now with just one eye.
 
My driving licence states that I need prescription glasses, it has never made a difference to my insurance. However, I suspect that if I ever drove without my glasses, and was in an accident, the insurance company could, and would, use it against me.
 
I have short sightedness in one eye, other eye is lazy. No issues getting through the eye test, just a note on the licence.
 
Thanks to all for taking the time to reply.
All very helpful info..
Tkx.
 
My 10 cents worth.

Whilst I agree with the technical and practical views expressed above - in so far as they go - I am uneasy on one point.

Insurance contracts are written on an uberrima fides basis.
This means that the parties are required to act with utmost good faith.
That raises the issue of material fact(s).

A material fact is one that is capable of influencing the mind of a prudent insurance underwriter in deciding whether or not to accept a risk proposed for insurance and, if so, on what terms and conditions.
This brings us to the issue of disclosure.

A proposer for insurance is required to disclose all material facts.
This duty of disclosure revives at every renewal.
If there is uncertainty about whether or not a fact is material the conventional wisdom is that it should be declared.
It is actually the right of the insurance underwriter to determine whether or not they consider a fact to be material.
It is never the right of the proposer [or party renewing] to determine what constitutes a material fact.
Failure to declare a material fact can render an insurance contract void from inception (or last renewal if the fact arose in the preceding year).

In relation to the eyesight issue I would suggest that to be capable of constituting a material fact.
IMHO the OP should declare it to the insurance underwriters.
They will probably ask for a letter from OP's GP confirming the clinical details and verifying that OP is fit to drive with the actual eye complaint.
If OP is medically fit to drive in GP's medical opinion there should be no problem.
BTW it does not follow that insurers will impose terms and conditions in relation to the issue.

The point is that if the fact is declared and accepted by the underwriters there is no future worry about non-disclosure.
 
I don't think that's a 10 cent worth piece of advise but rather a very valuable piece of advice and one that should be adhered to
 
There are plenty of people who get their first learning permit licence that have poor vision in one eye due to amblyopia (lazy eye).
The optometrist signs a D502 form to say that vision is good enough to drive (with or without glasses).

This does not get disclosed to insurance companies. This information (the need for glasses) is on the person's licence. (Which will generally be copied when getting insurance)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top