Car insurance help please

OpenToSuggestions · 20 Oct 2010 at 22:32

Car Insurance is up for renewal and I have a few questions that I think the OCUK Motors wisdom can resolve

Postcode is good
Insured in my name but dad still owner (as this way we have owned it since 2005).
2000 1.0 16v micra
Up to 6000 miles, no business use, student living away from home but car at home more than it is at uni. 1 year NCB. Driving 5 years, age 22.
£401.30 fully comp with £150 optional excess (plus £150 extra due to being under 25). This excess gave the best excess to premium savings.
Free courtesy car, unlimited windscreen cover and £1250 stereo cover.

Optional extras:
Personal injury cover £30
Hire car cover £30
As above but TPFT Puts the policy at £357.20 plus any extras on top. Windscreen cover only covers chips and proper cover is now £10.

Which is better to go for with a car valued at £800?
Do I bother with the hire car cover?
I am thinking of going fully comp with personal injury cover, as TPFT isn't much cheaper at all.

Any help is appreciated! Last year I just went fully comp but now the car is worth under £1000 I am not sure what to do this time around.
Thanks

[TW]Fox · 20 Oct 2010 at 22:43

Why bother with hire car cover or personal injury cover? You are hardly going to claim for a fault claim where the car is repaired so I doubt you'll get much use of a hire car anyway.

OpenToSuggestions · 20 Oct 2010 at 22:53

[TW]Fox;17616030 said:
Why bother with hire car cover or personal injury cover? You are hardly going to claim for a fault claim where the car is repaired so I doubt you'll get much use of a hire car anyway.

The website isn't too clear what exactly it is. I thought personal cover is I get things paid for, such as my uni fees if I am injured in an accident that I cause (but am covered either way if the accident is not my fault).

I may be wrong here though.

turbotoaster · 20 Oct 2010 at 23:14

mglover070588 said:
Insured in my name but dad still owner (as this way we have owned it since 2005)

this bit is the most important, i work for an insurance company and this very fact was brought up today actually.

can you confirm that the vehicle is registered in your dads name aswell as owning it?

OpenToSuggestions · 20 Oct 2010 at 23:34

turbotoaster said:
this bit is the most important, i work for an insurance company and this very fact was brought up today actually.

can you confirm that the vehicle is registered in your dads name aswell as owning it?

Yep. I was going to move it all to my name when the insurance was due last year, however that way it counts as another owner (the car is such low value that this is not an issue) so we have only owned it a few weeks rather than a number of years. This would have the put the premium up £40-£50.

lawz · 21 Oct 2010 at 03:47

Don't something like 90% of companies require the owner to also be listed as the main driver?

Who are you insured with?

iaind · 21 Oct 2010 at 08:00

lawz said:
Don't something like 90% of companies require the owner to also be listed as the main driver?

Who are you insured with?

Many will allow you to put down who the owner is and who is the main driver - if he puts his dad down as the owner and him as the main driver then it's perfectly legal.

[TW]Fox · 21 Oct 2010 at 08:14

iaind said:
Many will allow you to put down who the owner is and who is the main driver - if he puts his dad down as the owner and him as the main driver then it's perfectly legal.

What a load of rubbish, I can't think of a single insurance company who asks who the owner of the vehicle is, they are interested in who the registered keeper of the vehicle is!

iaind · 21 Oct 2010 at 08:17

[TW]Fox;17617249 said:
What a load of rubbish, I can't think of a single insurance company who asks who the owner of the vehicle is, they are interested in who the registered keeper of the vehicle is!

Yes that's what I meant, and I know owner does not equals keeper, but they are often used as interchangeable terms and I haven't had my coffee yet

turbotoaster · 21 Oct 2010 at 11:45

the vehicle must be registered to the person who insures it.

proving who owns it doesnt matter, its all about the registered keeper.

If the registered keeper is your dad and its insured in your name then its not valid insurance.

can you confirm who is the registered keeper, ie who is on the log book?

OpenToSuggestions · 21 Oct 2010 at 12:32

turbotoaster said:
the vehicle must be registered to the person who insures it.

proving who owns it doesnt matter, its all about the registered keeper.

If the registered keeper is your dad and its insured in your name then its not valid insurance.

can you confirm who is the registered keeper, ie who is on the log book?

Dad owns it (ie he paid for over half of it). It is parked at home most of the year and his name is on the log book ie the 'keeper'.

I just hold insurance as the main driver with both parents as named drivers as I was using it for work 5-6 days a week whilst at home on placement.

When doing quotes on the comparison sites, many insurers won't let me be the policy holder when I don't have my name on the documents. However the cheapest insurance for me is Admiral/Elephant/Bell and they accept this.

turbotoaster · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:17

just because they quote for it doesnt mean its legal.

the legal law of insurance is your not allowed to insure a vehicle you do not have a financial interest in.

Since this vehicle is in your fathers name you have no financial interest hence if you have an accident they wont pay out, because a company pop up a quote doesnt mean its correct

You need to either change it into your name as registered keeper.

Or put yourself as a named driver with the policy in his name, when putting how much you use the car, put it as the main driver.

theres a difference between being the main driver and having the policy in your name.

the only time your legally allow to insure a vehicle not owned by you is when the owner is your spouse/wife because when you married the law says you both own everything together

StevieP · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:27

The insurer of the vehicle has to have an insurable interest in it! Usually the only exception to this is for a spouse owning the car!

If I were you I'd re-register the car in your name - that way there are no queries with the insurer if there is an incident!

StevieP

eatcustard · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:31

turbotoaster said:
the vehicle must be registered to the person who insures it.

proving who owns it doesnt matter, its all about the registered keeper.

If the registered keeper is your dad and its insured in your name then its not valid insurance.

can you confirm who is the registered keeper, is who is on the log book?

Dont think this is correct

OpenToSuggestions · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:37

turbotoaster said:
the only time your legally allow to insure a vehicle not owned by you is when the owner is your spouse/wife because when you married the law says you both own everything together

This cannot be true.

When taking out last years insurance it asks for whose name is on the V5, then says what is their relationship to you (in a drop down box) and I selected parent.

If Admiral didn't want this then they would throw up an error message on the website.

StevieP · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:47

There isnt a law that states you can only insure a vehicle that is owned and registered to you BUT you will find that each individual insurer will apply a different (usually higher!) rate if the vehicle is not owned by you/your spouse.

It all comes back to insurable interest!

StevieP

OpenToSuggestions · 21 Oct 2010 at 13:51

So after all the OCUK attempts to try and discuess if my policy is legal or not,
should I be going for Fully Comp with £150 vol. excess and personal cover?

StevieP · 21 Oct 2010 at 14:43

mglover070588 said:
So after all the OCUK attempts to try and discuess if my policy is legal or not,
should I be going for Fully Comp with £150 vol. excess and personal cover?

I wouldnt personally! I'd see if you can make a saving on TPFT (or even TPO) cover!

You have an £800 car with a £500 excess = not worth claiming when you consider that 1 years NCB is roughly 30-35% of not just your next years premium but your next 3 years of insurance (the usual disclosure period for claims!)
Bear in mind its not just losing your bonus that will put your premium up, its also the fact that you have to disclose the claim for the next 3 years and that will make your subsequent premiums higher!

Hope this helps.......

StevieP

eatcustard · 21 Oct 2010 at 14:48

If you go fully comp and your car is written off your fault or not you get a payout quite quick.

TPFT it takes forever, (subject it being other parties fault) to get your £££.

If you can afford it it go fully comp

StevieP · 21 Oct 2010 at 15:07

eatcustard said:
If you go fully comp and your car is written off your fault or not you get a payout quite quick.

TPFT it takes forever, (subject it being other parties fault) to get your £££.

If you can afford it it go fully comp

Timescale on ALL payouts depend on the insurer and I can tell you some are good and others are rubbish!

If your car is written off in a non-fault accident and the third party are clearly to blame then by and large they get it sorted pretty quickly to minimise their own costs! (car hire etc) - this is unaffected whether you are comp or tpft!

As per my last post fully comp is not worth your while - the max you will get is £300 and at your age you will pay more than that over the next 3 years in lost NCB and a fault claim on your record!

StevieP

*edit* having said that, its not uncommon in insurance for comp cover to actually be cheaper than tfpt - of course it doesnt mean you have to claim if you have a fault claim! (assuming no third party of course!)