Anything wrong with this?

qz

I'm in the middle of considering my options as regards to learning to drive. I was considering a number of routes but one of them I'm not 100% sure about.

If my mother was to buy a (suitable starter) car (while already owning her own), but never drive it, would there be anything wrong with me effectively using it as my own and getting insured as a named driver under her policy on that car?

Wishbone Ash

qz wrote: »

would there be anything wrong with me effectively using it as my own and getting insured as a named driver under her policy on that car?

You would have to make a false declaration to the insurance company which may affect a claim!

Curran

Her No Claims Bonus would have no affect.
If you have your own policy already and get a 2nd car, you can only use the NCB on one of them!
So, you'd be better off getting your own policy with her named and build up your own NCB
If you have a GF, maybe get her as the policy holder, but the car would have to be registered in her name!

afatbollix

if she were to insure herself on the 2nd car she wouldent have and no claim bonus... it will prob be cheeper to just insure yourself and work up a no claim bonus

qz

As I feared, but it narrows the options anyway which is a plus!

Thanks for the help lads.

Wishbone Ash

qz wrote: »

As I feared, but it narrows the options anyway which is a plus!

Thanks for the help lads.

Just remember qz, that the insurance companies have heard of every trick in the book. They are not stupid.

Stephen

You might still get a discount on your quote if you nominate her (or any other female, pretty much) as a named driver on your policy.

AntiVirus

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Just remember qz, that the insurance companies have heard of every trick in the book. They are not stupid.

They were stupid enough to let me do that for 6 years on 2 different Celica's

chris85

AntiVirus wrote: »

They were stupid enough to let me do that for 6 years on 2 different Celica's

they were getting money from you werent they??? and if you needed to claim it would probably all come out and you may not have been covered.

Sounds to me like you were getting done

Del2005

chris85 wrote: »

they were getting money from you werent they??? and if you needed to claim it would probably all come out and you may not have been covered.

Sounds to me like you were getting done

+1. They have no problem taking your money, but when you start looking for some back they'll do a lot more digging.

Guy:Incognito

The insurance company really dont care what details you put in on the proposal. Thats where the "utmost good faith" part comes in. In fact it suites them more if you lie through your teeth because if you claim it doesnt cost them. You may aswell make a good scan of someone elses disc. At least that way it'll only cost you the price of the ink instead of the few hundred to the insurance co for nothing.

AntiVirus

chris85 wrote: »

they were getting money from you werent they??? and if you needed to claim it would probably all come out and you may not have been covered.

Sounds to me like you were getting done

So you can say that they wouldn't pay out on a claim. Sounds to me like you're just guessing

AntiVirus

Del2005 wrote: »

+1. They have no problem taking your money, but when you start looking for some back they'll do a lot more digging.

See above

chris85

AntiVirus wrote: »

So you can say that they wouldn't pay out on a claim. Sounds to me like you're just guessing

And so are you buddy and you would be the one f**ked if they didnt pay out in a claim. I dont take any chances when it comes to car insurance not like fools like you.

Your insurance is null and void for them six years as when you got insurance you agreed to terms which you have not met. Unless you can tell me it was all done properly but dont think so.

Do you feel lucky punk?

Stephen

AntiVirus: Go look up "utmost good faith".

AntiVirus

Stephen wrote: »

AntiVirus: Go look up "utmost good faith".

Principles of Insurance : Utmost Good Faith

Is the duty to disclose all material facts relating to the risk to be covered. A material fact is a fact which would influence the mind of a prudent underwriter in deciding whether to accept a risk for insurance and on what terms.

Examples:
Motor: Age of drivers, licence status, details of any accidents, claims or convictions, exact model of vehicle etc.
Household: Construction of house, location of house ie. close to river, any previous claims etc.

Duty of Disclosure applies to both the Proposer and the Insurer. Duty of disclosure operates at :

inception - until the date cover is confirmed by the Insurers

renewal - up to the renewal date

mid term alterations - until the Insurers confirm cover in respect of the alterations

chris85

AntiVirus wrote: »

Principles of Insurance : Utmost Good Faith

Is the duty to disclose all material facts relating to the risk to be covered. A material fact is a fact which would influence the mind of a prudent underwriter in deciding whether to accept a risk for insurance and on what terms.

Examples:
Motor: Age of drivers, licence status, details of any accidents, claims or convictions, exact model of vehicle etc.
Household: Construction of house, location of house ie. close to river, any previous claims etc.

Duty of Disclosure applies to both the Proposer and the Insurer. Duty of disclosure operates at :

inception - until the date cover is confirmed by the Insurers

renewal - up to the renewal date

mid term alterations - until the Insurers confirm cover in respect of the alterations

And there you go.

AntiVirus

chris85 wrote: »

And so are you buddy and you would be the one f**ked if they didnt pay out in a claim. I dont take any chances when it comes to car insurance not like fools like you.

Your insurance is null and void for them six years as when you got insurance you agreed to terms which you have not met. Unless you can tell me it was all done properly but dont think so.

The 6 years NCB says it certainly wasn't null and void?

chris85 wrote: »

Do you feel lucky punk?

Yeah! Like yesterday for example I was going along the Chapelizod by pass doing about 100kph in an 80kph zone. when I see this nice looking merc coming up behind me I pulled into the inside lane and slowed down to about 70kph to let the merc go by and have a look at the car when just over the crest 2 guards appear doing speed checks, now thats lucky!

chris85

You are an idiot mate

If in a crash the insurance company does their usual checks and would have found out. They do know what they are doing. The only thing you can see is the NCB and not the fact that you are a fool for having a policy that would not have been covered and if someone got injured you would just f**k off into your second celica and laugh you tosser.

Karma man. karma.

AntiVirus

chris85 wrote: »

You are an idiot mate

If in a crash the insurance company does their usual checks and would have found out. They do know what they are doing. The only thing you can see is the NCB and not the fact that you are a fool for having a policy that would not have been covered and if someone got injured you would just f**k off into your second celica and laugh you tosser.

Karma man. karma.

Why would I laugh if I had a crash? I don't have another celica?

chris85 wrote: »

you would just f**k off into your second celica and laugh you tosser.

Now that did make me laugh.

chris85

You insured two different celicas. presume they were both in your name as that is the point of this thread.

Doesnt matter, you dont seem to care that you would not have been covered. As long as your NCB bonus is ok.

AntiVirus

chris85 wrote: »

You insured two different celicas. presume they were both in your name as that is the point of this thread.

Doesnt matter, you dont seem to care that you would not have been covered. As long as your NCB bonus is ok.

Edit: Sorry my mistake I did say 2 Celica's above

The Celica was in my mother's name and I was a named driver. I did this for 6 years and then changed over to my own policy as I wanted to build up my own NCB, the 6 years NCB was not mine but my mum's. I only ever had to make one claim and that was for a new windscreen which doesn't effect the NCB. I now have my own 5 years NCB

Wossack

Stephen wrote: »

You might still get a discount on your quote if you nominate her (or any other female, pretty much) as a named driver on your policy.

works both ways: my gf got 80e off her policy by putting me as a named driver



reminds me, she owes me 80 quid!

chris85

AntiVirus wrote: »

Edit: Sorry my mistake I did say 2 Celica's above

The Celica was in my mother's name and I was a named driver. I did this for 6 years and then changed over to my own policy as I wanted to build up my own NCB, the 6 years NCB was not mine but my mum's. I only ever had to make one claim and that was for a new windscreen which doesn't effect the NCB. I now have my own 5 years NCB

Thats very different than what the thread is about and what i presumed you meant due to the relevance of the thread.

The OP is wants the mother owning two car and insuring them both in her name. Sounds fine what you done. you just insured a car in your own name but the car was your mothers. Bit different.

All is cool

Pete67

The insurance companies generally ask you to confirm that the policyholder is the main driver. If you insure a car in somebody elses name in order to get a cheaper quote, and put yourself on as a named driver when in fact you are the main driver, then you have made a false declaration. The insurance company would be perfectly entitled to say that the policy was null and void if you made a claim and they started investigating. How would you feel about taking on a lifetimes medical costs for somebody you injured in an accident?

mickdw

Pete67 wrote: »

The insurance companies generally ask you to confirm that the policyholder is the main driver. If you insure a car in somebody elses name in order to get a cheaper quote, and put yourself on as a named driver when in fact you are the main driver, then you have made a false declaration. The insurance company would be perfectly entitled to say that the policy was null and void if you made a claim and they started investigating. How would you feel about taking on a lifetimes medical costs for somebody you injured in an accident?

Even if insured using false declaration, the insurance company have to by law pay all claims by other parties against you. They will refuse your own claim though.
They can take you to court to recover costs incurred but this is very rare.

Some of the comments about about it only being as good as a scanned copy are therefore not true.
Still, Always better to be 100% correct with them.

Wossack

Id be interested to hear how they prove someone is, or isnt the main driver of a car...

Del2005

Wossack wrote: »

Id be interested to hear how they prove someone is, or isnt the main driver of a car...

Example from above.

Middle aged woman insures a Celica in her name and has son as named driver, not really a middle aged womans car. Or the extreme, Glanza insured by middle aged woman with young son as named driver again not the average car for a middle aged woman.

They will happly take their money put if there is crash they will start digging.

Or car insured with country address yet mainly used in different location.

Wossack

see but thats what I mean though..

'not really a middle aged womans car' is hardly proof.. just conjecture

theres no way to prove whos the main driver, or the main area of use, unless theres some gizmo fitted to the car whereby the driver is finger printed when turning the key, and the exact usage is mapped with gps

imo!

AntiVirus

Del2005 wrote: »

Example from above.

Middle aged woman insures a Celica in her name and has son as named driver, not really a middle aged womans car.

I always thought they were a hairdressers car?