Named Driver / Majority Driver Legislation?

gord · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:33

Helloooo

A tangent from a lecture today during algorithms and programming.

If you are a named driver on say a parents policy, however you are the majority driver, is that illegal? Is there actual legislation against it, as i would imagine the principle is like mis-informing the insurance company. However my lecturer, quite well learned so i quasi backed down, said he would be surprised if there was actual legislation against it. If there is legislation, where could i find it?

Scottland · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:37

It's not illegal in itself (AFAIK). But, technically it is lying to your insurance company for financial gain (in the form of a lower premium) so it would I assume constitute fraud.

kaiowas · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:37

gord said:
Helloooo

A tangent from a lecture today during algorithms and programming.

If you are a named driver on say a parents policy, however you are the majority driver, is that illegal? Is there actual legislation against it, as i would imagine the principle is like mis-informing the insurance company. However my lecturer, quite well learned so i quasi backed down, said he would be surprised if there was actual legislation against it. If there is legislation, where could i find it?

As long as the insurer has been informed that the named driver will do the majority of the driving and is still happy to provide the policy then there is nothing wrong.

Dolph · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:39

gord said:
Helloooo

A tangent from a lecture today during algorithms and programming.

If you are a named driver on say a parents policy, however you are the majority driver, is that illegal? Is there actual legislation against it, as i would imagine the principle is like mis-informing the insurance company. However my lecturer, quite well learned so i quasi backed down, said he would be surprised if there was actual legislation against it. If there is legislation, where could i find it?

Depends on the exact terms and conditions of the company policy.

There's not a specific piece of legislation that prevents it, however many insurance companies have in their T&C's that the policy holder is the majority driver. Because of this, if you do the Child on parent's policy for main driver with these companies, your insurance is void as you have knowingly breached the terms and conditions of the policy.

If you advise the insurance company what you are doing, and they are ok with it based on their policy documents, then there's no problem.

If your insurance is void, you can be prosecuted for driving without insurance, or the insurers could decline to pay out everything apart from the third party liability part of the claim.

-Dolph

gord · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:56

So there is no parliament passed law as is, however by lying you can void your policy and maybe unknowingly be driving without insurance for which there is a passed law against.

Nathan · 13 Mar 2006 at 11:59

They would have a VERY hard time proving you were not the majority driver. So I wouldnt worry about it

I did this from 17 - 20. At 21 I got my own insurance, for a nice amount.

Dolph · 13 Mar 2006 at 12:00

gord said:
So there is no parliament passed law as is, however by lying you can void your policy and maybe unknowingly be driving without insurance for which there is a passed law against.

In extreme cases, yes. Although it would be far more likely they would simply refuse to pay out for an incident (bar their legal obligation to third parties) rather than void the entire policy.

In theory it could go down as fraud as well if they could prove you had done it knowingly and deliberately, but that would be quite tricky to prove.

Dolph · 13 Mar 2006 at 12:03

Nathan said:
They would have a VERY hard time proving you were not the majority driver. So I wouldnt worry about it I did this from 17 - 20. At 21 I got my own insurance, for a nice amount.

No, they really wouldn't, the question is whether or not they believe it to be worth the effort.

Many people who do this are students, all they have to do is confirm whether or not the car is at school/college most of the time (for example)

If they have a £1million personal injury claim, or something along those lines, you can bet it would be investigated and it's really not that hard to prove. Ask neighbours, check records, check endorsements and so on.

But as usual some people always like to take the attitude of "the company couldn't know" when it suits them.... Companies are not stupid and toothless....

James_N · 13 Mar 2006 at 12:15

I did it for a year as churchill wanted £1500 a year for my grp 5 pug 306 HDI (90bhp)! in my dads name it was £450 :eek:

I then got rid of the pug and insured the CTR in my name for not much more than the pug would have cost me.

gord · 13 Mar 2006 at 12:24

Ok, cheers guys, and especially Dolph. Thanks for the info.

Just to clarify as it appears some of you have been mislead.. i am not actually affected by this, i was just under the impression it was illegal. Im fortunate enough to be on my own insurance.

ajgoodfellow · 13 Mar 2006 at 13:47

I agree with what's said above

The Insurance companies will check up - when I wrote my Mum's car off they briefly investigated to ensure that I wasn't the main driver (just a named driver)

I also got talking to a policeman on holiday once and he did mention that they can prosecute you for driving without insurance as your current insurance is void

If you tell your insurance company and they're OK then that's fine. Otherwise it's just not worth the risk

And it hurts paying £1500 FC for a Group 4 1.4 Astra!