2 Insurance policies

[Sparkzz]

Hi all,

Just a quick one. My brain is frazzled as I've been studying all day, so if it's a dumbo question, I'm excused.

My missus has just started driving, looking for a car for her. It seems to be cheaper for me to start a new insurance policy, list her as the main driver and me as a named driver (I will be policy holder, not main driver, but I will drive occasionally)

If she had an accident in her car, how does this effect my policy on my car (she is not named on it, I am the only driver and sole policy holder)

As I understand it, if I had an accident in her car I'd have to tell my insurance company, but if she had one, what would happen?

Thanks

[vonhosen]

She'll have had an accident, you'd have made a claim.

With that in mind how would you answer this question from your insurer?

"Have you had any accidents, claims, or losses in the last 5 years regardless of whether you were at fault or not?"

[Steve57]

how about a multi car policy, not sure what difference in whole terms but my insurance policy is mine, wife has hers, just all lumped together for one payment, managed to get mine massively cheaper when they mirrored wifeys NCB for me, as id been in a company van for years.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Why would you be the policy holder?

[Jimmyarm]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

Why would you be the policy holder?

This, your GF should be the policy holder and you just a named driver.

Same set up with my GFs' car, despite me having 6 points when we took it out it was still £150 cheaper to have me on it as a named driver. Not so with my Landcruiser though so she isn't allowed to drive it

That way if she has an accident, you don't have to declare it as it is nothing to do with you.

[Sparkzz]

It's cheaper for me to be the policy holder. It comes under my duties to deal with cars, bins and finance. She does cooking, cleaning and weekly shop.

[spitfire-ian]

Sometimes cheaper isn't necessarily better.

[Sparkzz]

spitfire-ian said:

Sometimes cheaper isn't necessarily better.

It's only a cheap car, third party insurance. I'll not make myself the policy holder if it's going to potentially effect me.

[ozzuk]

Any claim will also impact your other policy at renewal...worth remembering.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Sparkzz said:

It's cheaper for me to be the policy holder. It comes under my duties to deal with cars, bins and finance. She does cooking, cleaning and weekly shop.

But, that might give her/you a problem in the event of a claim. She would be the policy holder & main driver.

[Spitfire2]

It shouldn't be cheaper. I suspect you are trying to use your no claims twice which isn't generally permitted

[Sparkzz]

Spitfire2 said:

It shouldn't be cheaper. I suspect you are trying to use your no claims twice which isn't generally permitted

Nope.

To be honest, I've got my answer now. As usual the thread is going to descend into criticism of the OP and suggestions of doing something wrong. As I said before, It's cheaper for me to be the policy holder, which was the purpose of the question, does it effect my other policy, I'm not trying to use my NCB twice, as that would be wrong and stupid.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Sparkzz said:

Spitfire2 said:

It shouldn't be cheaper. I suspect you are trying to use your no claims twice which isn't generally permitted

Nope.

To be honest, I've got my answer now. As usual the thread is going to descend into criticism of the OP and suggestions of doing something wrong. As I said before, It's cheaper for me to be the policy holder, which was the purpose of the question, does it effect my other policy, I'm not trying to use my NCB twice, as that would be wrong and stupid.

I don't think anybody is being too critical, just offering advice. These insurers are slippery beggars. By making yourself the policy holder when it probably should be the other half you run the risk of a claim failing. Who the policy holder is should not be a matter of choice, but a matter of fact.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

I don't think anybody is being too critical, just offering advice. These insurers are slippery beggars. By making yourself the policy holder when it probably should be the other half you run the risk of a claim failing. Who the policy holder is should not be a matter of choice, but a matter of fact.

Nope. The policyholder would normally be the owner of the vehicle, regardless of who the main driver is. So long as the insurers are made fully aware of the facts about who the main driver is, there is no chance of a claim failing.

But the policyholder doesn't have to be the vehicle owner, so long as this is explained to and agreed by the insurers.

[martinbiz]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Nope. The policyholder would normally be the owner of the vehicle, regardless of who the main driver is. So long as the insurers are made fully aware of the facts about who the main driver is, there is no chance of a claim failing.

But the policyholder doesn't have to be the vehicle owner, so long as this is explained to and agreed by the insurers.

Exactly, just explain the fact to the ins co and your safe and make it clear that she is the main driver so there is no question of fronting.

Doesn't matter what's said on here, if they are happy then your away and get them to put it in an email to you, don't just rely on a phone call

[Spitfire2]

Sparkzz said:

Nope.

To be honest, I've got my answer now. As usual the thread is going to descend into criticism of the OP and suggestions of doing something wrong. As I said before, It's cheaper for me to be the policy holder, which was the purpose of the question, does it effect my other policy, I'm not trying to use my NCB twice, as that would be wrong and stupid.

or more accurately, the OP is going to start taking the huff when constructive comments are made.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

I don't think anybody is being too critical, just offering advice. These insurers are slippery beggars. By making yourself the policy holder when it probably should be the other half you run the risk of a claim failing. Who the policy holder is should not be a matter of choice, but a matter of fact.

Nope. The policyholder would normally be the owner of the vehicle, regardless of who the main driver is. So long as the insurers are made fully aware of the facts about who the main driver is, there is no chance of a claim failing.

But the policyholder doesn't have to be the vehicle owner, so long as this is explained to and agreed by the insurers.

I was assuming that the partner would be the owner in these days of equality

[WillG]

So much bs in this thread. Nothing wrong with you being policyholder and other half being main driver, as long as you tell insurance company. Nothing wrong with car belonging to whoever, providing you tell the insurance company.

To answer your actual question, this will depend totally on the view of the insurance company for who you are next buying insurance. There is no right or wrong answer.

In my experience most insurance companies will only take your other half's claim into account if she is a named driver on your other car. That accident forms part of her driving history. Some, but very few insurers would take the view that her accident forms part of your claims history.

The view maybe slightly different if a theft claim, or vandalism claim as this is less driver related.

But the only people who can answer for sure are your next insurers.