Insuring under parent's name legal?

Hi

I have a question. I want to insure a car under my mother's name (who does not possess a driver license). Is that legal? If not, why?

Thanks

Reply 1

Kingspharm

LOL don't know whether it's legal or not, but when you ring up to insure the car, the insurance company will ask what type of licence your mother has. At the very least, she needs to have a provisional car licence in order for them to insure her.

Reply 2

ninman

even if your mother did have a license it's still illegal. It's called fronting and if they find out that your mother was not the main driver your insurance would be come invalid.

Reply 3

john williams

No its not illegal, as i presume ud also be named on the policy with your mum as main driver, however insurance companies now ask for details of named drivers so ur insurance will still be high. Also if ur mum hasnt built up any no claims insurance it'll be as costly as if you just put it in your name.

Reply 4

Anne Auraque

Also I wouldn't chance them not finding out, becasue if you have a crash they will. I would imagine you'll be put on some kind of blacklist with a 'no insurance' conviction.

Reply 5

.Andrew.

emin

Hi

I have a question. I want to insure a car under my mother's name (who does not possess a driver license). Is that legal? If not, why?

Thanks

I gather you've got a full driving license, not a provisonal? Id imagine it would be more to insure if you say what kinda license your mum has, no matter what her age! Would be cheaper to insure on your own surely? :confused:

Im not sure if its illegal, but you obviously won't get any NCB's if you do insure it under your mum and you as secondary driver. And also, as she has a provisional license, she'd need someone presant whose been driving for "x amount" of years (3 or 5 years) as she'd be classed as a "learner", and if you are driving and have a crash, im sure you'd be pretty screwed insurance wise.

Reply 6

ninman

you a man or a woman? Remember insurance companies are allowed to be sexist but not racist. i.e. a black man pays the same as the white equivalent, however a teenage woman pays half as much as a teenage man.

So if you're a woman quit whining, because it's the men who pay the consequences of their sexist rules.

Now I can see why insurance companies care about age, length of time driving, no claims bonus and so on. If I could get a sex change that lasts for two or three years and then become myself again I would, because I'm lumped in the same group as "boy racers", just because I'm a man. It doesn't matter that I don't speed or am in any way a "boy racer" and in fact hate "boy racer's" myself.

So if you're a woman the sexism works in your favour and you should not complain about having "expensive" car insurance. If you're a man you have my sympathies.

Reply 7

asar

I find all this insurance thing amazing. The insurance for my new Micra covers anyone who drives it, and you're asked no details at all regarding the driver on the policy. You just have to tell them your car's model and you get a standard quote. Actually, more expensive cars like Volvos have prepaid one-year insurance included, no questions asked, documents in the glove compartment when you go pick the car up. I'm 17 and as long as I have a valid driver's permit with me and it's before 11 PM, I get full coverage.

Reply 8

lovelee-jublee

Anne Auraque

Also I wouldn't chance them not finding out, becasue if you have a crash they will. I would imagine you'll be put on some kind of blacklist with a 'no insurance' conviction.

But what I can never understand is how can they possibly find out!? If it's insured in someone elses name as main driver and you as named, yet you drive it more, then you crash it....how do they know that that wasn't the first time you've driven it? Surely they can't be expecting named drivers to not have a crash at all, then when they do tell them their insurance is invalid? :confused:

Reply 9

PS Reviewer

lil_lee

Insurance companies will do anything in their power to avoid paying out on a claim (obviously that's not necessarily a bad thing - it helps keep insurance premiums down...).

If they recieve a claim from a car that's got a parent as main driver and son/daughter as named driver, especially if it's on a small car, they'll investigate into the claim as much as they like (looking at who owns the car, the circumstances of the accident, if they parents are insured to drive any other cars etc etc).

I've known an insurance company refuse to pay out until the people concerned provided them with evidence that the main driver *was* the main driver. Depending on the terms and conditions in your policy insurance companies can refuse to pay out in all sorts of circumstances without them having to do much investigating at all.

If you've got your own car then you should get your own insurance as well...it's expensive but so is dealing with an accident if your insurance company refuse to help you.

If you don't want to be insured as main driver on a car - don't BE the main driver on a car.

Reply 10

dimexi

I think if you answer the questions wrong it is illegal; and come on! lets face it; most people don't answer the questions honestly .i.e. the parent is usually not the main driver. Also the insurance companies say your parents can't use their no - claims bonus on more than one car; so if you have more than one car in the household already under your parents names then it is kind of pointless because they would then have to start the insurance from scratch and then register you as a second driver; aggreable it would be cheaper but I don't think it's worth the hasstle because of all the protocols that would emerge during a claim..

I say insure it under your name; that's what I do, it saves you all the hassle..

Reply 11

emin

Thanks for the comments guys.

It is just that I have seen many students insure their cars on their (older) relative's name.

Reply 12

Tarts_n_Vicars

It's not illegal but if the insurance company found out it would invalidate the coverage. You either sign or consent to a statement saying something along the lines of "the information that I gave you to provide me with the insurance was correct" and if it subsequently comes out that the info WASN'T correct you're screwed. :smile:

Reply 13

pghstochaj

It is illegal, it is insurance fraud...a form of theft. Driving without insurance is also illegal (which you could get 'done' for if your insurance invalidated)

Reply 14

Steeps

you would be better off insuring the car under your own name, and then adding a relative as a named driver, that way the policy becomes cheaper and you can rack up your own NCB. however i don't think that you could insure someone without a licence as they are not allowed to drive the vehicle in the first place :wink:

Reply 15

dan_black

i feel somewhat qualified to answer this question as i work for direct line insurance (biggest insurers in the uk). It is not illegal in the slightest providing your mum or her spouse is the owner and registered keeper of the car. if your mum does not have a licence that is fine, just declare her as not driving, and name the main driver correctly (although in all fairness the company following a claim rarely find out). The reason it is legal is because: 17 year olds cannot enter credit agreements, but your mother can. this means insurance companies would have to force 17 year olds to pay huge premiums in one lump sum, which can rarely happen. If your mum is the policy holder she can hold a credit agreement and therefore the policy can be paid monthly. whats more your mother does not have to pay the instalments, a 17 year old CAN on their own account as they are not liable for missed payments, its the policyholder who is! by law, the main insurance requirement is the owner and registered keeper is the policy holder or the spouse/common law partner of the policy holder, as in an accident it is the policy holder which gets paid out not the owner. The way i have my insurance set up, and i am 17 is, mum as policy holder and named driver, myself as the main driver. I pay on my own account the monthly installments each month and my mother is the owner and registered keeper of the car. The policy holder DOES NOT have to be the main driver of the car, nor do they even have to drive the car. if you have any more questions pm me :smile:

Edit:
after reading other posts on here i would like to dispel other myths that may help others out.
1) It IS cheaper to insure under a parents name, with the younger driver as the main driver, and 0 no claims than to insure in a 17 year olds name with the same details with direct line ( who also underwrite churchill, priviledge and a few other companies.)
2) with direct line and their subsequent companies, if in a 17 year olds name, it is Not cheaper but COSTS MORE to insure someone older on the policy like a parent as a named driver.
3) the big thing! direct line alone offer named drivers no claims discount, these are also backdated, so if you have been named on your parents policy for the past 3 years, you would have 3 years ncd. Churchill, Priviledge and others are following in 4 months time and the ncd will be transferrable only within these companies. Because of this direct line have seen sales with young drivers named soar in the past 6 weeks and are swallowing a fast amount of the market. Therefore other companies are going to have to follow in order to combat this! Direct line has stated they intend to accept named drivers no claims from other companies outside their group once they follow.

if you are with direct line, churchill or priviledge therefore, you gain to save and lose nothing by doing insurance the way i have done.