What is the "Second Permittee" doctrine ? The elements of the "second permittee" doctrine have been set out as follows: When a third person uses a car via another person who did have permission to use the car, this is a permissive use under the insurance policy as long as "the use falls within the scope of the permission." (Citations omitted.) Allstate Ins. Co. v. Wood, 211 Ga. App. 662, 663 (440 SE2d 78) (1994). To determine whether the use falls within the scope of the permission, the test is: (1) whether the owner's permission to the first permittee included the use to which the third person put the car; (2) whether the scope of the permission the third person received from the first permittee exceeded the scope of permission given the first permittee by the owner. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Walker, 219 Ga. App. 84, 85 (464 SE2d 230) (1995). The "second permittee" doctrine provides that "the permission to use contained in an omnibus clause refers to the purpose for which permission was given and not to the operation of the vehicle." Ga. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 190 Ga. App. 593, 594 (1) (379 SE2d 619) (1989). Therefore, if Chapman's use of the car was not for the same permitted purpose for which Mincey was given the use of the car, then Chapman's use is not permissive and he is not an insured under the policy. See Walker, supra. Ga. Farm & Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., supra at 594. In Walker, the son was given the father's car to drive back to school, to use while at school, and to drive back home. The son gave the car to a friend who drove it out of state to be fitted for a bridesmaid's dress. Id. This Court held that the friend's use of the car exceeded the scope of permission given by the father to the son for the use of the car. Id. at 85.