Fronting - named driver

Window1

Any suggestions please!

Scenario - student daughter with full driver's licence for a number of years is a named driver on her parent's car and the parent is the car owner and main policy holder. Going forward, the parent would like to allow the daughter to drive the car most of the time (daughter would like this too😅) and the parent is conscious that they want to avoid fronting so is offering to pay extra for the daughter to be the main driver on the policy and the parent would then become the named driver and drive the car occasionally. According to a number of insurers contacted, the only way that this can be done is to have the daughter become the owner of the car! So while the parent is willing to pay the extra for the insurance, he is not willing to relinquish ownership of the car. It seems they can't win though - ill at ease to give main driving time to the daughter if she is only a named driver, and yet not being allowed to insure her as the main driver unless he also passes over ownership of the car to her too! Is anyone aware of any car insurance company that allows the insurance of the main driver on a car they don't own? Does this not happen all the time with rental cars - insured to drive the car that you don't own ? Any suggestions welcome.

Esel

No. The only way this is allowed is between spouses, because it is considered that each spouse has an 'insurable interest' in the vehicle.

For everyone else, they must own the vehicle to have an insurable interest.

Rental companies insure their vehicles, not the renter.

Window1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122893597#Comment_122893597

Thanks for the reply. It would be great if insurance companies recognised that offspring have an 'insurable interest' too😅. I just find it hard to accept that a parent who is trying to be helpful - and honest with the insurance company - would have to give up actual ownership of their vehicle to allow their daughter be the main policy holder! If the insurance company allowed the daughter be the main policy holder, they get almost twice as much as a premium than if the parent effectively lies and names themself as the main policyholder and the daughter as a named driver, knowing that she is going to be doing most of the driving. The system certainly doesn't help someone trying to be honest and careful!

Esel

Except that is not being honest and careful!

If the parent trusts the offspring to be the main driver, they should trust them enough to transfer ownership.

That's the way it is, and should remain IMO. Otherwise, why not let learner drivers be unaccompanied etc. etc.

Lots of fronting going on, though.

Where would the car be kept overnight in your scenario?

Window1

Thanks for replying. The daughter is a student, lives at home, so car remains in the usual driveway. Don't know too many parents who can afford to give away ownership of their car just like that. Fronting is the dishonest practice in my opinion - wanting to pay the substantial extra premium to make the daughter the main driver is the honest way, again in my opinion. But I don't think the parent is in the financial position to just give their car away!

Eggs For Dinner

You cannot insure anything where there is the possibilty of making financial game. In the OP's scenario, the daughter could benefit from a claim without having paid for the car in the first place