I have been reading about the issues with "fronting" where an insurer might refuse a claim if they can prove that the car was insured by, for instance, a parent to save the main user of the car, their young offspring, a small fortune.
However does this effect a husband and wife who have two cars and who both use both cars approximately equal amounts, could the insure take a similar line if they suspected that, for instance, the car insured by the husband was used more by the wife? Also is the matter of to which party the car is registered a factor?
Lastly, another scenario, what about the aged parent who lives locally and has a nice comfortable car that is not really being used who puts his married with family daughter (who has her own car and car insurance) on his policy as a named driver so she can take him shopping, to the doctors, hospital etc though she ends up doing more mileage in the car than him?
Thanks.
|
|
Would there be any problem with just writing to the insurer, explaining the usage, and letting them tell you if they have a problem? If they know, and don't object, I don't see how they could refuse a claim.
|
|
It has been common in the past for parents to insure their kids cars, if this is now being clamped down upon I wonder if there is a policy in place that might have implications for other named drivers.
|
Did exactly this when I was a youngun. My dad's policy on a car legally owned by him but driven by me. We explained this to the insurance company at the time (Direct Line) and they were fine with it, even down to having me named as the main driver on the insurance certificate, despite it not being my policy.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
|
|
|
Some real life experience:
We have a Citroen C3 and a Nissan Almera.
I am the registered keeper of the C3 and my wife the keeper of the Almera. I pay the finance on the C3. I insure the C3 and my wife the Almera. We are both insured to drive the other's car.
Due to a mixture of ill health and common or garden desire, my wife bagged the C3 more and more until i said to her one day that we'll swop, so we did, e.g. swopping driving glasses, CD's and all the other rubbish you tend to carry around, plus i gave the Almera a good clean. If we go somewhere as a family, i drive, and we take the C3.
Strictly speaking, i ought to notify DVLA, which would add an additional owner to each car's V5. Plus of course, the C3 is on finance in my name, which would be confusing if my wife was the keeper.
I called the insurer (who insures both cars) and explained the situation. Nice lady said that it would £25 to swop the policies. But she also pointed out that we are both insured to an equal standard and level of cover on both cars, and really it didn't make any difference. So we left it alone.
We regard it that "we" have two cars, and take whichever one is available or appropriate to where we're going. We are both adequately insured and have it confirmed by the insurer (but not in writing!).
HTH
|
You can't "add a driver to a V5"
I think it's a risk thing. Two cars, two drivers of similar history of claims and experience = no problem. The problem arises where the 'real' risk is greater than the insured risk like a 'named driver' being the main user and of less experience etc than the policy holder.
|
You can't "add a driver to a V5"
>>
Sorry, obviously didn't make that clear. What i meant was each car have 1 previous owner. By swopping the cars from mare to mrs mare and vice versa and mean that the V5c would show 2 previous owners. Not a problem for the Almera, but a problem for a C3 just past it's first birthday, and the subject of a finace agreement with a previous keeper.
I think it's a risk thing. Two cars, two drivers of similar history of claims and experience = no problem. The problem arises where the 'real' risk is greater than the insured risk like a 'named driver' being the main user and of less experience etc than the policy holder.
I agree, my wife and I passed our tests at roughly the same time, and both have had no claims, although i have 3 points (again no premium increase), so the driver is relatively easily interchangable.
|
|
I think Mare's scenario is fairly typical, clearly in his case the insurer did not have a problem and Mare did the right thing in asking. However if there is a crack down on 'fronting' does it leave people inadvertantly vunerable, who own and insure a car in all good faith and - perhaps due to a change of circumstances, health, a job move etc - let someone else, as a named driver, use it more than they do?
|
|
I added my daughter to my policy once when she was less than twenty;the firm was happy to do it as long as she did not go more than 100 ml. away from our house.
|
We tried this "loophole" when I got my first car. It was made obvious that I could only make two journies a week (mileage unlimited) and none of those could be to Uni or Work.
|
They must have tightened up on this then. When I was doing it in the mid to late 90s the insurance company were well aware that I was the main driver and that despite the car being registered at an address in Wrexham it was "normally kept" in Sheffield (where I was at university). I even had a claim in Sheffield (car was broken into) and they were fine about it - they picked up from and delivered back to my Sheffield address.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
I don't think there is a single answer - some insurance companies take a more lax view than others.
A question I often ask the insurance co is 'How do I ascertain - is it miles, or number of journeys?' If it's miles, then it's me, else it's the wife - or possibly my daughter.
Some companies get very shirty and start quoting all sorts of dubious rules - they don't get my business. My business goes to the company who accepts what I tell them (which will be the truth at that time) and sets a reasonable premium.
I've never arranged insurance for myself when it's really for the kids - though I have sometimes owned the car.
|
|
I don't see how this could work anyway, how are the insurance company going to monitor the usage of the car? If son/daughter is away at uni and has a prang, then you just say on the form you were borrowing it for a few days.
|
With similar driving/claims records, most insurers will not be too bothered about which spouse has main use; it is accepted that this sort of thing can and does change in most households from time to time.
Fronting for your kids on the other hand is a practice that has always led to policies being rescinded and claims denied, but has become more of an issue due to the inexorable rise in premiums for younger drivers and the increase in people looking for the non-existent loophole.
Younger drivers have to accept that driving isn't some God-given right if you can't afford it. It took me 9 months from passing my test to being able to afford the insurance on my first car.
$$
|
|
Only nine months? I spent my entire 3 years at uni carless (as did most of my mates). It amazes me how many students (even 6th formers) seem to 'need' a car to get around these days. Not having a car of course freed up much need blue and brown drinking vouchers :-)
|
People think they have been cunning and "got on over" on the ins companies but Insurance companies are not quite a stupid as people would have them believe, they know full well what is going on.
Now that the costs of their laxness are becoming more apparent, they are starting to take a tougher line.
|
Also they look at the total number of cars in a household. If there are already two cars that the parents previously insured then adding a third car and then stating that their 17yr old offspring will be an added driver is an obvious case of fronting.
I used to work for an insurance co and what I always used to say to people who always claimed that tehy could get a fast one on the company was "what are you buying the insurance for?" they would say "to protect me if I have an accident" I then said "would you risk that protection not being there by falsifying the situation" and yet they still were happy to pay for cover that might not be there....usually they saw the light.
Certainly until 17-25 year olds stop having way above average nos of accidents, serious accidents and total right offs they will be charged alot more and rightly so.
|
When daughter was away at uni she had her own car and own insurance, but generally kept her car at home. However as a named driver on my policy she would occasionally use my car for convenience, reliability and/or safety reasons. I remember discussing the issue of 'main user' of a vehicle with a major uk insurer. They could not define if it was the mileage, time or number of trips. We then somehow got into a conversation about if it was in the charge of a (named) driver for 24, 48 or 72 hrs or longer. I even spoke directly to an underwriter to get some intellectual input to the conversation and to try to define the parameters and was presented with the conclusion that the 'main user' was the person who was driving the car at the given point in time. So much for intellectual input!
The basic outcome was that you would not want more than one claim arising from a (named) driver over an undefined period of time to ensure that no difficulties (or questions) would arise.
All very academic as there were no accidents or claims involved, but shows that if you try to get clarification for sensible reasons you end up in a minefield of misinterpretation and misinformation!
--
pmh (was peter)
|
|
