Every driver in Hong Kong holds this cover. Very few could say what it does.
Third party liability motor insurance is the compulsory floor of motor cover. It is required by statute for any vehicle used on a road, it is the reason a motor policy exists at all in the eyes of the law, and it is entirely concerned with other people. What it does for you is nothing. That is not a defect. It is the design.
This guide sets out what the law demands, what the compulsory layer pays for and what it never touches, the one misunderstanding that costs drivers most, and what happens when the driver who hits you turns out to have no cover at all. Every statutory figure below comes from the ordinances themselves or the Government-funded legal information service, not from memory.
Read next
For what a policy costs, car insurance cost in Hong Kong for 2026 works through the numbers, and what expats get wrong about car insurance covers the mistakes. Our motor insurance page sets out what we arrange.
In this article
- What the law actually requires
- What third party liability motor insurance pays for
- The four things it never pays for
- The misunderstanding that costs the most: you are not a third party
- What sits above the compulsory layer
- Excess, named drivers and the detail that decides a claim
- When the other driver has no insurance
- Driving across the boundary
- How this plays out in practice
- what a fully comprehensive motor policy adds on top, the fuller cover tier this third-party discussion sits beneath.
What the Law Actually Requires
The governing statute is the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance, Cap. 272[1]. Section 4(1) “obliges any person using (and any person permitting others to use) a motor vehicle on a road must be covered by an in-force motor insurance policy in relation to the use in respect of third party risks in compliance with the statutory requirements”[3].
Read that slowly, because three things fall out of it.
The duty is on the user, not only the owner. The section reaches “all users (including a car owner and all permitted users or drivers)”[4]. Permitting another person to drive your uninsured vehicle is inside the offence, not adjacent to it. Lending a car is not a casual act in Hong Kong law.
The statutory core is people, not property. The requirement is built around liability for death and bodily injury. Property damage cover is standard in practice, and every insurer we place with includes it, but it is not what the statute is fundamentally protecting.
It attaches to use on a road. The obligation follows use rather than ownership, which is why a car kept off-road long-term sits differently from one parked on the street.
The statutory minimum is HK$100 million
The floor is not vague and it is not set by the insurer. “The minimum amount of liability arising out of one event to be covered by a statutory motor insurance policy is prescribed under section 27 of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Regulations (Cap. 272A) to be HK$100 million”[2][3].
That figure looks enormous until you price a catastrophic injury: loss of earnings for the remainder of a working life, long-term care, and adapting a home. It is the one figure on a motor policy no insurer may discount.
It shows straight through the market. AXA’s iMotor covers third party death or bodily injury “up to HKD 100,000,000”[6], and Zurich carries the same HKD 100,000,000 in both its third party and comprehensive columns[7]. That is the statute showing through the product.
What happens if you do not have it
The penalty has a third limb most drivers do not know about. “The maximum penalty of contravening section 4(2) is a fine up to HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months. Further, a person convicted of this offence would be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for such a period as the court may determine being not less than 12 months nor more than 3 years from the date of conviction”[3][4].
The fine is survivable. The disqualification of at least twelve months reorganises somebody’s life. And it does not end there: without cover, “you and the permitted driver(s) would have to bear the civil liability of bodily injury or death caused to any third party”[4]. The claim does not disappear because the policy did. It arrives at your own door, uncapped.
The point of the whole regime: it exists to protect the person you injure, not to protect you. Every benefit that protects you sits in an optional layer above it, and has to be bought deliberately.
What Third Party Liability Motor Insurance Pays For
Three things, and one of them surprises people.
Bodily injury to third parties. The scheme protects “any third party (e.g. passengers, pedestrians, other car users etc.)”[3], and the people in your back seat are inside that definition[15] — the one genuinely reassuring feature of the compulsory layer.
Who counts as a third party
Six ticks and two crosses. The two crosses are the whole reason the optional layers exist[3][15].
Damage to third-party property. Another vehicle, a wall, a shopfront, a set of railings. This sits under a separate and very much lower limit than the injury cover, and the limit varies by insurer and by plan. AXA’s iMotor covers “damage to other people’s property up to HKD 2,000,000”[6]; MSIG’s Private Motor Car plan covers “damage to third party property as a result of an accident arising out of the use of your car up to HK$2,000,000”[10]; Zurich offers “options from HKD 2,000,000 up to HKD 10,000,000”[7].
So the injury limit is fixed by statute and identical everywhere, while the property limit is a genuine choice that differs fivefold across the market. Almost nobody checks it.
Legal costs. The cost of defending a claim, which on a contested injury claim is substantial in its own right.
| What is covered | Third party only | Comprehensive |
|---|---|---|
| Death or injury to other people | HK$100,000,000 | HK$100,000,000 |
| Damage to other people’s property | HK$2,000,000 to HK$10,000,000 by insurer and plan | HK$2,000,000 to HK$10,000,000 by insurer and plan |
| Your own vehicle | Not applicable | Loss or damage, including at your own fault |
| Medical expenses for you and your occupants | Not applicable | Commonly HK$4,000 to HK$5,000 a policy year |
| Personal accident for the driver | Not applicable | Commonly HK$100,000 |
| Windscreen, towing, substitute vehicle | Not applicable | Included or optional by insurer |
Third party against comprehensive, using the published benefit tables of three insurers on our panel. The “not applicable” entries are their wording, not ours[6][7][10].
The Four Things It Never Pays For
Allianz puts the whole exclusion in a single sentence: third-party liability insurance “does not offer protection for the drivers or their vehicle”[14]. MSIG says the same thing from the other direction: third-party insurance “does not cover the driver for death and injury, or for damage to the insured vehicle”[15]. In practice that resolves into four separate holes, and drivers discover them one at a time at the roadside.
Your own vehicle. The most obvious gap and still the most misunderstood. If you are at fault, third party liability motor insurance repairs the other car and stops. Your own vehicle is your problem, whether that is HK$8,000 of bodywork or a total loss.
Your own injury. The third-party section covers your liability to other people. It does not cover you as the driver. Personal accident cover, whether standalone or as an add-on, is a separate item and is not included by default on every policy. Where it is included on a comprehensive plan, the sums are modest by design, commonly around HK$100,000 for death or loss of limbs or sight[6][10], with medical expenses around HK$4,000 to HK$5,000 a policy year[6][10]. Useful, but not the answer to a serious injury on its own.
Your passengers’ belongings. Passengers are covered for injury, clearly so. The laptop in the boot is not: belongings inside the insured vehicle sit outside third-party property cover.
The excess. Every claim carries one and they stack. It applies before anything is paid, and on a small claim it can exceed the claim.
A fifth item is less a gap than a widely held mistake: that third-party cover somehow shelters a no-claim discount. It does not. Where NCD protection is offered at all it is a comprehensive-plan feature with conditions, and MSIG’s holds the discount after a claim only if “after the application of excess, the claim amount does not exceed HK$60,000 or 15% of the sum insured (whichever is the less); and no third party bodily injury is involved in the claim”[10]. The moment somebody is hurt, it falls away.
That matters because the discount is worth real money. MSIG’s published scale runs 20% after one claim-free year to 60% after five or more consecutive years[13], and losing it is a larger financial event than most of the small claims people consider making.
The Misunderstanding That Costs the Most: You Are Not a Third Party
This is the most expensive misreading of a motor policy in Hong Kong, and worth setting out properly because the logic is not obvious.
The reasoning goes: my policy carries HK$100 million of third party bodily injury cover, I have been badly hurt in my own car, therefore HK$100 million stands behind my injury. It sounds reasonable and it is wrong.
MSIG publishes a claim case that puts it beyond argument. A company director drove the company’s insured vehicle carelessly, caused an accident and seriously injured herself, then claimed under the third party bodily injury cover on that same policy. The claim failed, because she “did not belong to the type of persons intended to be covered by the compulsory legislation”. The case cites Cooper v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (1985), in which third party risks cover “excludes the actual driver”[11].
The compulsory layer exists so a person injured by a negligent driver can recover. You cannot simultaneously be the negligent driver and the person the scheme protects from that driver. The HK$100 million is real, and not for you.
MSIG’s own conclusion is the practical one: hold separate medical and personal accident insurance for your own injuries[11]. It is a small line on a motor premium, and it is the gap we most often find open when we review an existing arrangement.
Sources: Cap. 272 and Cap. 272A, and the Community Legal Information Centre’s summary of both[1][2][3].
What Sits Above the Compulsory Motor Insurance Layer
Three optional layers, each answering a different question.
Third party, fire and theft adds cover for your own vehicle in two circumstances only. It is narrower than the name suggests, does nothing for collision damage, and the price gap to full comprehensive is often smaller than people expect. Worth asking for in writing: on a mid-value car it is sometimes poor value in both directions.
Comprehensive adds damage to your own vehicle including at your own fault, and pulls in everything the third party column marks “not applicable”: medical expenses, personal accident for the driver, windscreen, towing and a substitute vehicle. Zurich carries vehicle rental up to HKD 4,000 or taxi fees up to HKD 2,000 while your car is off the road, with roadside repair and towing each up to HKD 2,000[7]; MSIG waives the excess on a windscreen claim not exceeding HK$5,000 and lets you keep your NCD[10].
Whether comprehensive is worth buying is arithmetic rather than sentiment: the annual premium, plus the excess you would actually bear, against the realistic market value of the car and what a total loss would pay. Allianz frames the same test in one line, that “for older vehicles with high mileage, third-party insurance is often a cost-effective choice”, while a new car or a need for broader protection points the other way[14].
Add-ons are rated individually and several are genuinely useful: personal accident for the driver, legal expenses, a courtesy car, named-driver extensions, and cover for driving across the boundary. Electric vehicles have opened a further category, and it is not trivial: Zurich’s EV plan includes enhanced charger third party liability of up to HKD 20 million per accident per policy year[8], which is a liability most EV owners have never considered they were carrying.
Excess, Named Drivers and the Detail That Decides a Claim
Three things decide what a claim looks like, and none are on the front page of a quote.
The excess stacks. An excess is, in MSIG’s definition, “simply a deduction of an agreed amount from the payment which the insurer is obliged to make to indemnify the insured”[12]. The word “simply” is doing a lot of work, because they rarely arrive alone: a standard excess, a young driver excess, an inexperienced driver excess and an unnamed driver excess can apply to one claim simultaneously where the driver is under 25, licensed under two years and unnamed on the schedule. Know the combined total before you need it.
Named drivers matter. Cover attaches to “the liability of the car owner and the driver(s) authorized or permitted by the owner to use the car”[3]. An occasional driver never properly declared is a disclosure issue, and those surface at claim time rather than renewal.
Disclosure is continuous. Material facts have to be disclosed so the insurer can decide “whether to accept the risks, set premium or other terms of the policy”[3]. A change of address, a change of use from social to business, a modification, an additional regular driver: all material, all notifiable. Insurers do not generally object to being told. They object to finding out afterwards.
| Where cover can fall away | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| An unauthorised driver | Somebody drove who was never permitted or named under the policy |
| Alcohol or drugs | Driving under the influence at the time of the accident |
| Use outside the specified territory | Driving beyond where the policy says it applies, including across the boundary |
| Breach of the limitation as to use | Using a social-and-domestic car for hire, reward or a trade |
The four standard exclusions on a Hong Kong motor policy. Each one is a live claim risk, not fine print[3].
One reassurance, because this is often misunderstood the other way round. If you are the innocent party claiming against somebody else’s insurer, it cannot generally refuse you because its own policyholder has not paid their excess: MSIG’s published case on the point is blunt that the insurer had no right to decline on that basis, unless the policy expressly makes the excess a condition precedent to payment[12].
Six checks worth doing before renewal
1Read the certificate, not the brochure. Find the injury and property damage limits separately. The first is HK$100 million by statute; the second is a choice somebody made on your behalf.
2Total your excesses. Standard, plus every additional one that could apply to anyone you would let drive.
3Check who is covered to drive, and whether a regular driver has quietly never been named.
4Decide about personal accident for yourself. The compulsory layer does not provide it and, on the case law, cannot.
5Ask what your no-claim discount is actually worth in dollars before you make a small claim.
6Arrange cross-boundary cover before you travel, not at the crossing.
Those are indicative descriptions rather than quotations. Our policy and pricing documents are client-confidential and we go through them with you in full, so you see every option we put in front of you.
When the Other Driver Has No Car Insurance
The statute cannot make every driver comply, so Hong Kong built a backstop underneath it that most drivers have never heard of.
The Motor Insurers’ Bureau “commenced operations on 1st February, 1981”, and “all insurance companies in Hong Kong are required to be members”. Its purpose is narrow and clearly stated: to “secure the satisfactory settlement of claims in respect of liability for death or bodily injury that arises from the use of motor vehicles on the road”. It steps in where the at-fault insurer is insolvent, where there was no insurance, or where the vehicle cannot be traced[5].
There is one limit on it that matters enormously and is easy to miss: “the Bureau does not accept liability for any claims relating to property damage”[5].
Follow that through. If an untraced driver injures you, there is a mechanism. If an untraced driver writes off your parked car and disappears, the Bureau is not the answer, and neither is your own third-party policy, which only ever looked outward. The only cover that responds is comprehensive. For anybody who parks on the street overnight, that is a more persuasive argument than any brochure.
Driving Across the Boundary: Does Your Liability Follow?
A standard Hong Kong motor policy is written for use in Hong Kong. Cross-boundary driving is a separate arrangement, and the market treats it as a distinct product rather than an extension: Zurich offers a “Northbound Travel for Hong Kong Vehicles” plan alongside, and separate from, its Private Motor Car plan[7][8].
Two consequences follow. Use outside the specified territory is a standard policy exclusion[3], so driving north without arranging cover does not merely leave a gap, it can put the whole policy response in question. And it is organised in advance of the journey, not at the crossing.
We go through exactly where that policy stops and what needs arranging before you cross in a separate look at driving into Mainland China.
How This Plays Out in Practice
The people below are invented. The situations are real, they are the kinds of thing we see every week, but the individuals are not, and we would never tell a client’s story in a way that could identify them.
Assumed his own car was covered — Wilson*
*Fictitious persona based on situations we see regularly. We never reveal client information.
Wilson is 41 and was at fault in a collision, holding third-party cover on a car he had owned for years. The other driver’s repairs went through without difficulty, the compulsory layer working as designed. His own car was not covered at all. On the value of that car, third-party cover was defensible; the surprise was avoidable, and one line of the certificate would have avoided it.
Injured, and not insured for it — Grace*
*Fictitious persona based on situations we see regularly. We never reveal client information.
Grace is 36 and was injured in an accident that was not her fault. Her instinct was that the HK$100 million on her certificate stood behind her injury. It did not: the driver is not in the class the scheme protects. Recovery came through a claim against the other driver, which took time she could not comfortably wait through. Personal accident cover would have paid something immediately.
Correctly insured already — Ken*
*Fictitious persona based on situations we see regularly. We never reveal client information.
Ken is 58 and drives a low-value car short distances. He asked about upgrading to comprehensive. On that vehicle’s market value, the premium plus the excess would have approached anything the insurer could realistically pay on a total loss. The honest answer was that third-party cover suits him and the money is better kept aside, with one change: personal accident cover for himself, the actual gap. Recommending less is sometimes the recommendation.
How You Make Sure the Motor Cover Matches the Risk
Third-party cover is the layer the law cares about. Whether anything above it is worth buying is a calculation, and it changes every year as a car ages. I would rather go through it with you now than after a claim.
We read what you actually hold
Send us the certificate and schedule. We find the two liability limits, the full stack of excesses and who is really named to drive. That alone usually answers the question.
We price the three levels side by side
Third party, third party fire and theft, and comprehensive, against the real market value of the car and what a total loss would pay. With the trade-off attached to each, not just a number.
We close the gap that is actually open
Usually personal accident for the driver, sometimes the property damage limit, sometimes cross-boundary cover. Then we are here at renewal and at claim time.
Speak with us today
No pushy sales. Just honest advice from a licensed Hong Kong broker.
Phone: +852 3563 9771
Email: [email protected]
Office: Suite 701, Connaught Commercial Building, 185 Wan Chai Rd, Wan Chai, HK
Get a Free Quote
Frequently asked questions
Is third party liability motor insurance compulsory in Hong Kong?
Yes. Section 4(1) of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance, Cap. 272, obliges any person using, and any person permitting others to use, a motor vehicle on a road to be covered by an in-force third party policy[3]. The duty follows the use of the vehicle, not only its ownership, so lending your car to somebody puts you inside the section as well.
What is the minimum cover the law requires?
HK$100 million for liability arising out of one event, prescribed by section 27 of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Regulations, Cap. 272A[2][3]. That applies to third party death and bodily injury. Property damage carries its own, far lower limit, which is set by the insurer and the plan rather than by statute, and runs from HK$2,000,000 to HK$10,000,000 across our panel[6][7].
What is the penalty for driving without insurance?
A fine of up to HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months, and on conviction a disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence for a period the court determines, being not less than 12 months and not more than 3 years[3][4]. Separately, you would carry the third party’s civil claim personally, which is not capped[4].
Does it cover damage to my own car?
No. Third-party insurance does not cover the driver for death and injury, or for damage to the insured vehicle[15]. Insurers print this plainly: under AXA’s third party column, “Your Car” reads “Not applicable”[6]. Your own vehicle is only covered under comprehensive, or under third party fire and theft in the specific cases of the vehicle being burnt or stolen.
Am I covered if I am the one injured?
Not by the third-party section. A published Hong Kong claim case makes the point directly: a director who injured herself driving her company’s insured vehicle could not claim under the third party bodily injury cover, because she “did not belong to the type of persons intended to be covered by the compulsory legislation”, following Cooper v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (1985)[11]. Personal accident and medical cover for the driver are separate items, and the insurer’s own advice is to hold them separately[11].
Are my passengers covered?
Yes, for injury. The compulsory scheme protects “any third party (e.g. passengers, pedestrians, other car users etc.)”[3], and third-party cover “only covers loss arising from an accident for a third-party, including a passenger of the insured vehicle”[15]. Their belongings are a different matter and generally sit outside it.
What happens if the other driver has no insurance?
For injury, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau exists for exactly that. It has operated since 1 February 1981, every insurance company in Hong Kong must be a member, and its objective is to secure satisfactory settlement of death and bodily injury claims arising from the use of motor vehicles on the road, including where there was no insurance or the vehicle is untraceable[5]. For your own vehicle, however, there is no equivalent: “the Bureau does not accept liability for any claims relating to property damage”[5].
Does an at-fault claim affect my no-claim discount?
Generally yes, and third-party cover does not shelter it. Where an insurer offers NCD protection it is a comprehensive-plan feature with conditions attached: MSIG’s holds the discount only if, after the excess, the claim does not exceed HK$60,000 or 15% of the sum insured, whichever is less, and “no third party bodily injury is involved in the claim”[10]. The discount is worth having: the published scale runs to 60% after five or more consecutive claim-free years[13].
Am I covered to drive into mainland China?
Not automatically. Cross-boundary cover is sold as a separate arrangement rather than an extension of a Hong Kong policy, with insurers offering a distinct “Northbound Travel for Hong Kong Vehicles” plan alongside their private motor plans[7][8]. Use outside the specified territory is a standard exclusion,[3] so this is organised before the journey, not at the crossing.
Is third-party cover ever the right answer?
Often, and we say so when it is. The test is arithmetic: the comprehensive premium plus the excess you would actually bear, against the realistic market value of the car. As Allianz put it, “for older vehicles with high mileage, third-party insurance is often a cost-effective choice”, while a newer car points the other way[14]. Where we do recommend staying on third party, we almost always recommend adding personal accident cover for the driver alongside it.
Expat Insurance Editorial Team
Our articles are prepared by the Expat Insurance editorial team, drawing on the day-to-day casework of our licensed brokers and insurance specialists in Wan Chai. Between them, our advisors bring more than 60 years of combined experience arranging medical, life, business and personal insurance for expatriates and local families across Hong Kong.
Sources & references
- Hong Kong e-Legislation, Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance, Cap. 272: the governing statute. Section 4 makes it unlawful to use, or to cause or permit any other person to use, a motor vehicle on a road unless an in-force third-party policy is in place; contravention carries a fine of HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months.
- Hong Kong e-Legislation, Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Regulations, Cap. 272A: the subsidiary legislation setting the floor. Section 27 prescribes minimum third-party cover of HK$100 million arising out of any one event — which is why that figure is identical on every private motor certificate in Hong Kong, whatever the insurer or cover level.
- Community Legal Information Centre, F. Motor Insurance: the Government-funded plain-language statement of the regime, and the source of most of the legal detail here. Confirms that section 4(1) “obliges any person using (and any person permitting others to use) a motor vehicle on a road” to hold cover; that the section 27 minimum is HK$100 million; that the penalty is “a fine up to HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months” with disqualification of “not less than 12 months nor more than 3 years”; that the scheme protects “any third party (e.g. passengers, pedestrians, other car users etc.)”; and that exclusions include unauthorised drivers, alcohol or drugs, and use outside the specified territory.
- Community Legal Information Centre, Q4: Am I bound to purchase third party liability insurance for my car under the law?: states that section 4 “requires all users (including a car owner and all permitted users or drivers)” to hold third party insurance, and adds the civil exposure — without cover “you and the permitted driver(s) would have to bear the civil liability of bodily injury or death caused to any third party”.
- Community Legal Information Centre, The Motor Insurers’ Bureau: establishes the backstop and its limit. The Bureau “commenced operations on 1st February, 1981”, “all insurance companies in Hong Kong are required to be members”, and its “principal objective… is to secure the satisfactory settlement of claims in respect of liability for death or bodily injury that arises from the use of motor vehicles on the road”, covering insurer insolvency, no insurance and untraceable vehicles. Critically for this article: “The Bureau does not accept liability for any claims relating to property damage.”
- AXA Hong Kong, AXA iMotor Insurance: a published panel benefit table proving both halves of the third-party point. Liability runs “for death or bodily injury to other people up to HKD 100,000,000 and damage to other people’s property up to HKD 2,000,000”, while its own Third Party column records “Your Car — Not applicable” and “Medical Expenses — Not applicable”. Comprehensive adds medical expenses up to HKD 4,000 a policy year, personal accident up to HKD 100,000, and windscreen replacement up to HKD 5,000 without change in NCD.
- Zurich Insurance (Hong Kong), Private Motor Car Insurance Plan: the published benefit table showing third party bodily injury at HKD 100,000,000 and property damage as “options from HKD 2,000,000 up to HKD 10,000,000” — the fivefold spread cited above — with own damage, fire and theft, motor personal accident of HKD 100,000 and medical expenses appearing only in the Comprehensive column. Also the source for vehicle rental up to HKD 4,000 or taxi fees up to HKD 2,000, and roadside repair and towing each up to HKD 2,000. It separately offers a “Northbound Travel for Hong Kong Vehicles” plan, establishing cross-boundary cover as a distinct product.
- Zurich Insurance (Hong Kong), Private Motor Car Insurance Plan (Electric Vehicle): source for the EV charging liability point: “enhanced charger third party liability coverage” covering accidental battery damage and including “up to HKD 20 million liability coverage per accident per policy year”. Carries the same separate “Northbound Travel for Hong Kong Vehicles” plan.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Motor Insurance: Third Party or Comprehensive?: confirms that “the law in Hong Kong requires the vehicle owner to purchase third party liability insurance as basic protection”, and that it “would provide compensation for death, bodily injury and property damage suffered by the third party”. Comprehensive by contrast “provides compensation to the insured for loss arising from traffic accidents, floods, fire or theft”, and “naturally, the premium for comprehensive insurance is higher than third party insurance”.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Private Motor Car: a second panel benefit schedule, and the source of the NCD Protector conditions. Third party property damage runs “up to HK$2,000,000”; personal accident provides “HK$100,000… to cover death, loss of limbs or sight for you or any named driver”; medical expenses are capped at “a maximum of HK$5,000”. The NCD Protector holds the discount after a claim only if “after the application of excess, the claim amount does not exceed HK$60,000 or 15% of the sum insured (whichever is the less); and no third party bodily injury is involved in the claim”.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Can a named driver claim bodily injury as a third party?: the published claim case behind the central section of this article. A company director drove the company’s insured vehicle carelessly and seriously injured herself; her claim under the Third Party Bodily Injury cover failed because she “did not belong to the type of persons intended to be covered by the compulsory legislation”. The case follows Cooper v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (1985), holding that third party risks cover “excludes the actual driver”.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Third party property damage excess in a motor insurance policy: a claim case in which an insurer refused an innocent third party’s claim because its own policyholder had not paid the third party property damage excess. Establishes the definition used above — the excess is “simply a deduction of an agreed amount from the payment which the insurer is obliged to make to indemnify the insured” — and the outcome, that the insurer had no right to decline on that basis unless the policy expressly makes it a condition precedent to payment.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Everything you need to know about no-claims discounts: the published NCD scale used above: 20% after one claim-free year, 30% after two, 40% after three, 50% after four and 60% after “5 or more consecutive years”.
- Allianz Hong Kong, Comparison of comprehensive and third-party insurance: a third panel insurer stating the exclusion in one line — third-party liability insurance “does not offer protection for the drivers or their vehicle” — and the selection guidance quoted above, that “for older vehicles with high mileage, third-party insurance is often a cost-effective choice” while a new car or a need for broader protection points to comprehensive.
- MSIG Insurance (Hong Kong), Demystifying comprehensive and third party liability insurance for motor vehicles: the clearest published statement of the passenger position and the driver exclusion together. Vehicle owners “are only required by law to purchase third party insurance”; that cover “only covers loss arising from an accident for a third-party, including a passenger of the insured vehicle”; and it “does not cover the driver for death and injury, or for damage to the insured vehicle”.
- Expat Insurance motor placement records (2026): the source of the observations about how rarely the third party property damage limit is checked, and how often personal accident cover for the driver is the gap we find open on an existing arrangement. Client confidential information. Our policy and pricing documents are shown to clients in full during the advisory process, so you see every option we put in front of you.
Disclaimer: insurance products, benefit schedules, statutory figures and the rules governing them in Hong Kong change from time to time, and linked content may be updated or become out of date after publication. This article is general information only and is not personal financial, insurance, legal or tax advice.
Benefit limits quoted are from insurers’ published materials at the time of writing and are indicative rather than an offer; what is right for you depends entirely on your own circumstances, your vehicle and how you use it. Our policy and pricing documents are client-confidential and are shown to clients in full during the advisory process, so you see every option we put in front of you. Please contact us, call +852 3563 9771 or request a quote before making any decision.
