First car - narrowed it down to 2

Hxc · 29 Jun 2011 at 22:38

Everyone on my insurance has driven my car at least once, and there is always a concievable reason that they might need to.

If I had put my mother with her auto only licence on... they might've had a reason to er, consider whether it has a practical use

DB_SamX · 30 Jun 2011 at 00:46

Deific said:
Something odd after putting my father as the proposer and me as an additional driver, despite him having driven his whole live with no accidents or convictions etc. putting him as the proposer increases the insurance by £1000?!? How does that work?

Sounds like that would effectively be fronting though.

Wicksta · 30 Jun 2011 at 02:36

stockhausen said:
And I am sure that insurers will not have seen through this ploy and would never look into how often this "lower risk driver" actually drove the car in the event that you made a significant claim

Are you being serious here? I can never tell if this consistent dumbness is just an act or not.

On what possible grounds would they have to refuse a claim by Peerzy because he decided to add his mother to his insurance, his mother who lives in the same house as him and where the car is kept? She doesn't have to use the car ever but if she did need to in some kind of emergency then she is insured to do so. Ignoring any cost implications either way it's hardly unusual to insure close family members you live with to drive your car.

Raymond Lin · 30 Jun 2011 at 07:13

Wicksta said:
Are you being serious here? I can never tell if this consistent dumbness is just an act or not.

On what possible grounds would they have to refuse a claim by Peerzy because he decided to add his mother to his insurance, his mother who lives in the same house as him and where the car is kept? She doesn't have to use the car ever but if she did need to in some kind of emergency then she is insured to do so. Ignoring any cost implications either way it's hardly unusual to insure close family members you live with to drive your car.

Exactly. Besides, I don't see it as a loophole, it's a rule that they made and people are utilising it. They made it a point that adding a named driver could lower insurance, they could easily made it more expensive to add a named driver (as to me, that seems more logical, more people can drive the car, more chances it is on the road and more likely of accident) but they didn't.

lawz · 30 Jun 2011 at 07:40

You are insuring your car agaisnt the chance that an accident will occur.

You add a named driver on the chance that they will drive your car.

I would think it unfair for an insurance company to say "Well you added Mrs X onto your policy, so she MUST drive the car". Its the same as them saying "Well you have added yourself onto the policy so you MUST crash the car because thats what the insurance is there for"

Its absurd.

stockhausen · 30 Jun 2011 at 08:28

So, why would you add an older, lower-risk person then? Really?

Raymond Lin said:
Exactly. Besides, I don't see it as a loophole, it's a rule that they made and people are utilising it. They made it a point that adding a named driver could lower insurance, they could easily made it more expensive to add a named driver (as to me, that seems more logical, more people can drive the car, more chances it is on the road and more likely of accident) but they didn't.

It is entirely clear that people use this as a ploy to reduce their premium, there is no point pretending otherwise. The end result may be, as you and others have implied, that where a young person adds an older, lower-risk person, insurers may wise up and do something about it - maybe they wont.

Whatever, it is quite clear that some people submit very dubious insurance applications which could cause problems further down the road - perhaps they wont and the rest of us will all end up paying higher premiums to account for it

mattyprice4004 · 30 Jun 2011 at 10:19

Silly quotes, I pay £900 for a 2.5 V6 and I'm 22.

DRZ · 30 Jun 2011 at 13:23

stockhausen said:
It is entirely clear that people use this as a ploy to reduce their premium, there is no point pretending otherwise. The end result may be, as you and others have implied, that where a young person adds an older, lower-risk person, insurers may wise up and do something about it - maybe they wont.

Whatever, it is quite clear that some people submit very dubious insurance applications which could cause problems further down the road - perhaps they wont and the rest of us will all end up paying higher premiums to account for it

It is quite clear that you should just stop posting.

InvaderGIR · 30 Jun 2011 at 13:25

mattyprice4004 said:
Silly quotes, I pay £900 for a 2.5 V6 and I'm 22.

My 2.8 i6 was £800 at 21.

hurfdurf · 30 Jun 2011 at 13:32

DRZ said:
It is quite clear that you should just stop posting.

This has been clear for quite some time

DM · 30 Jun 2011 at 13:38

stockhausen said:
It is entirely clear that people use this as a ploy to reduce their premium, there is no point pretending otherwise. The end result may be, as you and others have implied, that where a young person adds an older, lower-risk person, insurers may wise up and do something about it - maybe they wont.

Whatever, it is quite clear that some people submit very dubious insurance applications which could cause problems further down the road - perhaps they wont and the rest of us will all end up paying higher premiums to account for it

If it all gets too much for you son there's always suicide, cheap, dont hurt for long, then all these things that irritate you wont any more

Philz0r · 30 Jun 2011 at 14:40

hmmm recently they've made millage a massive part inn premiums. I think mine use to be about 40 pounds to go up 3k miles. Using confused it was about 120 more for 3k miles. Glad i walk to work now lol.

Fr0dders · 30 Jun 2011 at 16:14

stockhausen said:
It is entirely clear that people use this as a ploy to reduce their premium, there is no point pretending otherwise. The end result may be, as you and others have implied, that where a young person adds an older, lower-risk person, insurers may wise up and do something about it - maybe they wont.

Whatever, it is quite clear that some people submit very dubious insurance applications which could cause problems further down the road - perhaps they wont and the rest of us will all end up paying higher premiums to account for it

you're completely misunderstanding what the purpose of the named driver is.

The insurance companies make no stipulation that the named driver must drive the car a set amount of time. There is no requirement to drive the car at all, it is perfectly acceptable to add them in case they ever need it, even if the don't. Check your policy small print.

If the insurance companies didn't want this, they could easily clarify in the T&Cs that a minimum amount of driving time is required. Just like they have done with parents who take out insurance in their name and put their children as named drivers and then never drive the car. It is made very clear that this is not acceptable.

Deific · 1 Jul 2011 at 06:14

mattyprice4004 said:
Silly quotes, I pay £900 for a 2.5 V6 and I'm 22.

Which insurer and how long have you been driving/NCB?

Deific · 2 Jul 2011 at 03:06

Well I've finally decided on a 2005 Volvo S40 2L and can insure it for a reasonable price now =D so all is good. Notice you have an S60 T5 Mr LOL, niiice

bastic · 2 Jul 2011 at 08:32

Deific said:
Well I've finally decided on a 2005 Volvo S40 2L and can insure it for a reasonable price now =D so all is good. Notice you have an S60 T5 Mr LOL, niiice

was just looking on same car...how much did you ended up with insurance ?
mine quote was around £1300-1400 and car value around 2900

Iamzod · 2 Jul 2011 at 10:05

Joshy said:
my mum is a few thousand miles away in another country

Loophole failed there, if the company i work for got wind of that you'd have a problem as if she spends more than a certain amount of time out of the country we wouldn't class her as a permanent UK resident, therefore making her uninsurable, bye bye policy! :eek:

Either that or a hefty backdated price rise without her on, payable in full before your claim would go ahead.

Lashout_UK · 2 Jul 2011 at 11:21

InvaderGIR said:
My 2.8 i6 was £800 at 21.

My 5.7 V8 was £550, at 21

Joshy · 2 Jul 2011 at 11:22

Iamzod said:
Loophole failed there, if the company i work for got wind of that you'd have a problem as if she spends more than a certain amount of time out of the country we wouldn't class her as a permanent UK resident, therefore making her uninsurable, bye bye policy!

Either that or a hefty backdated price rise without her on, payable in full before your claim would go ahead.

You're not going to grass on me, are you?

Evoss · 2 Jul 2011 at 11:42

Deific said:
I haven't passed yet. I'm looking at just how practical (or not) moving over to a car would be financially as it's something I may have to face. It's not really enticing moving from a high performance sport bike to a fairly medicore car and having to pay double the insurance.

lmao, I can see you getting one of these a ploughing it into a wall within a week.

Get a 1.2 Clio or something along those lines, having a semi powerful car wont make you look cool when your in hospital xD

Deific said:
Well I've finally decided on a 2005 Volvo S40 2L and can insure it for a reasonable price now =D so all is good. Notice you have an S60 T5 Mr LOL, niiice

/sigh

Your not Schumacher.

First car - narrowed it down to 2

Capodecina