Ex-wife named driver-cheaper premium - illegal?
Discussion
98elise said:
Shopping around means internet, and thats way more geared to younger people.
If you can show young people are charged way more than their risk then you have a huge business opportunity on your hands. Start a business selling cheaper insurance that all the rip off companies and you will make a mint.
My sons insurance is 10 times mine, if you offer it for 5 times mine then he will buy it. You will be making 400% profit.
But would you? the reason young peoples premiums are higher is statistically they are more likely to have an accident. So yes you could make 400% profit but that would soon be lost on the one large claim.If you can show young people are charged way more than their risk then you have a huge business opportunity on your hands. Start a business selling cheaper insurance that all the rip off companies and you will make a mint.
My sons insurance is 10 times mine, if you offer it for 5 times mine then he will buy it. You will be making 400% profit.
And if there was ever a hope for such an idea perhaps the expert rip off insurance companies might have thought of it?
I think that pretty much every male and a goodly number of the females in my daughter's class at school had significant crashes.
Sounds a fine commercial idea to me! : D
I think that pretty much every male and a goodly number of the females in my daughter's class at school had significant crashes.
Sounds a fine commercial idea to me! : D
Drumroll said:
98elise said:
Shopping around means internet, and thats way more geared to younger people.
If you can show young people are charged way more than their risk then you have a huge business opportunity on your hands. Start a business selling cheaper insurance that all the rip off companies and you will make a mint.
My sons insurance is 10 times mine, if you offer it for 5 times mine then he will buy it. You will be making 400% profit.
But would you? the reason young peoples premiums are higher is statistically they are more likely to have an accident. So yes you could make 400% profit but that would soon be lost on the one large claim.If you can show young people are charged way more than their risk then you have a huge business opportunity on your hands. Start a business selling cheaper insurance that all the rip off companies and you will make a mint.
My sons insurance is 10 times mine, if you offer it for 5 times mine then he will buy it. You will be making 400% profit.
I believe its risk based so we get charged according to the risk profile we fit.
98elise said:
Thats the point I was making, the previous poster was saying that younger drivers are charged more because they will accept it, ratherbthen it being risk based. I was saying that if that was the case then there would be a huge busines opportunity for someone to undercut the market.
It was just a suggestion I'd seen somewhere else and it struck me as no less mad then some of the other things insurance companies do.If you were going to be cheaper on young persons insurance it'd be a bit bonkers to knock 50% off - talk about leaving money on the table! 5% would be a significant difference in £'s.
Anyway, it kinda happens already - some firms quote higher for young drivers as they're not interested in that business.
All good points guys.
To clarify, she is my ex-wife but we still have a good relationship as we have two boys. Looking at the certificate, I haven't even changed her name to mine but as long as we could produce the marriage/divorce certificates then we would have been ok in the event of a claim. I'll make sure it's changed at the next renewal in January.
I guess if she was ever in difficulties and I was sat at home then I would lend her the car if she asked. She commented lately that I'm still insured on hers as well.
Not all divorces end in restraining orders!
To clarify, she is my ex-wife but we still have a good relationship as we have two boys. Looking at the certificate, I haven't even changed her name to mine but as long as we could produce the marriage/divorce certificates then we would have been ok in the event of a claim. I'll make sure it's changed at the next renewal in January.
I guess if she was ever in difficulties and I was sat at home then I would lend her the car if she asked. She commented lately that I'm still insured on hers as well.
Not all divorces end in restraining orders!
O/T but I have a single-seater motorcycle which, for some reason the insurance company included pillion (passeneger) cover as an option.
I explained that as it is a single-seater there was no need for this and suggested they remove the cover but they then wanted to charge more so I left it as is.
Oddly I have 2 other bikes that are both fitted with twin-seats and the same insurance company wanted to charge more for pillion cover.
As I never carry a passenger anyway I opted not to do this, leaving me in the odd position of only being insured to carry a passenger on the one bike that can't.
What is charging more for a passenger about anyway? I've never heard of it with cars?
Insurance companies eh?...
I explained that as it is a single-seater there was no need for this and suggested they remove the cover but they then wanted to charge more so I left it as is.
Oddly I have 2 other bikes that are both fitted with twin-seats and the same insurance company wanted to charge more for pillion cover.
As I never carry a passenger anyway I opted not to do this, leaving me in the odd position of only being insured to carry a passenger on the one bike that can't.
What is charging more for a passenger about anyway? I've never heard of it with cars?
Insurance companies eh?...
Insurance companies use statistical methods to assess risk and then charge according to the results.
Hence such factors as postcode of your address, age, gender, occupation amongst a myriad others.
Make of car and potential repair costs for that model also come into it.
Have you noticed the statement re withdrawal of cover if inaccurate/false details are put on the application?
Lieing is a definite no-no as that gives an easy opt out for the insurer. When you get your policy details do you read them to check for small details that might cause issues?
A few years ago my son was home for a year on work placement for his degree. I bought a cheap car for him to use.
Friday I phoned to set up insurance and agreed the deal. He used the car on the weekend.
Monday, the papers arrived. I checked them.
He was down as a named driver as requested. Further on there were conditions noted, one stating he was NOT insured to drive the car!
So....which was correct? I phoned to query and was told they made an error in the price (too low)and wouldn't insure him for that amount. I asked where he stood as driving without insurance on the weekend and asked why they didn't phone under a duty of care to let us know of the change. What would they have done about any accident between Friday and Monday?
They responded by reinstating him under the agreed cost when pushed, after I threatened to complain formally,stating to them that they were lax in their process to protect him/me/third parties.
So.....answer questions truthfully and then check the terms carefully on arrival. If you have any doubts get clarification.
Ex wife as named driver? Simply query it with them. Don't give them a wriggle out reason. If you are on good terms with her then as an occasional second driver it should not be a problem. After all, she might need to borrow the car so....
Hence such factors as postcode of your address, age, gender, occupation amongst a myriad others.
Make of car and potential repair costs for that model also come into it.
Have you noticed the statement re withdrawal of cover if inaccurate/false details are put on the application?
Lieing is a definite no-no as that gives an easy opt out for the insurer. When you get your policy details do you read them to check for small details that might cause issues?
A few years ago my son was home for a year on work placement for his degree. I bought a cheap car for him to use.
Friday I phoned to set up insurance and agreed the deal. He used the car on the weekend.
Monday, the papers arrived. I checked them.
He was down as a named driver as requested. Further on there were conditions noted, one stating he was NOT insured to drive the car!
So....which was correct? I phoned to query and was told they made an error in the price (too low)and wouldn't insure him for that amount. I asked where he stood as driving without insurance on the weekend and asked why they didn't phone under a duty of care to let us know of the change. What would they have done about any accident between Friday and Monday?
They responded by reinstating him under the agreed cost when pushed, after I threatened to complain formally,stating to them that they were lax in their process to protect him/me/third parties.
So.....answer questions truthfully and then check the terms carefully on arrival. If you have any doubts get clarification.
Ex wife as named driver? Simply query it with them. Don't give them a wriggle out reason. If you are on good terms with her then as an occasional second driver it should not be a problem. After all, she might need to borrow the car so....
Edited by sospan on Tuesday 29th November 16:17
The advice about checking everything is spot on.
Can you explain though, how having an ex-wife as a named driver, assuming she has been declared as such, would give them an excuse to wriggle out of a payout?
What happens if the OP had a crash before any named drivers got to drive the car? How would he prove they would've done?
Too much tinfoil hattery on this thread.
Can you explain though, how having an ex-wife as a named driver, assuming she has been declared as such, would give them an excuse to wriggle out of a payout?
What happens if the OP had a crash before any named drivers got to drive the car? How would he prove they would've done?
Too much tinfoil hattery on this thread.
Simple reason really. Pistonheads is full of varying comments from people who DO know what they are talking about and others who speculate and appear to know. If you have a query rs insurance by all means ask in here but.....surely the definitive answer will come from the insurers?
Better to be safe than sorry in the nd.
As for whether a named driver will ever drive the car...there might be clauses in the small print that could disqualify them for whatever reason. Hence my comment re checking the paperwork details and my experience described with my son.
Different insurers take different attitudes and preferences for their T&Cs .
It is unlkely that an ex wife would be excluded as anyone could be named but, for the sake of simply asking them for certainty?
Better to be safe than sorry in the nd.
As for whether a named driver will ever drive the car...there might be clauses in the small print that could disqualify them for whatever reason. Hence my comment re checking the paperwork details and my experience described with my son.
Different insurers take different attitudes and preferences for their T&Cs .
It is unlkely that an ex wife would be excluded as anyone could be named but, for the sake of simply asking them for certainty?
The difference with your situation is the insurance company had made a mistake.
I've never seen a policy that specifies all named drivers MUST drive the car or at least have the INTENTION to drive the car during the policy term. Calling it fraud is plain ridiculous.
I reckon if you phoned your insurance company and asked if named drivers had to at least have the intention of driving the car, you'd get a long, drawn out "ummmmmm....".
We used to have an actual insurance bod on here but some whiny little b
h didn't like his tone so he got banned. He would've shot this thread down in about 3 minutes. 
I've never seen a policy that specifies all named drivers MUST drive the car or at least have the INTENTION to drive the car during the policy term. Calling it fraud is plain ridiculous.
I reckon if you phoned your insurance company and asked if named drivers had to at least have the intention of driving the car, you'd get a long, drawn out "ummmmmm....".
We used to have an actual insurance bod on here but some whiny little b
h didn't like his tone so he got banned. He would've shot this thread down in about 3 minutes. Update on this thread as my renewal came in.
I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
Fastchas said:
Update on this thread as my renewal came in.
I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
Dominate the I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
Fastchas said:
Update on this thread as my renewal came in.
I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
So what happened? You took the ex-wife off, and it jumped back up to £478 from £407, but when you added her as a named driver, rather than spouse, it dropped to £470?I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
If thats the case, then spouse reduces policy more than a named driver, which makes sense on a risk basis. Of course, they dont ever have to drive, despite some people pretending they know what they are talking about saying they do.
Trax said:
Fastchas said:
Update on this thread as my renewal came in.
I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
So what happened? You took the ex-wife off, and it jumped back up to £478 from £407, but when you added her as a named driver, rather than spouse, it dropped to £470?I was amazed at the renewal price that came last week so called them to discuss, they dropped the price from £469 to £407 (47yo, 320D touring, quieter side of Aleppo it seems, considering the price).
I queried the issue about the ex and ex was not updated on the insurance as not being my partner living at my address any longer.
In the insurers interest, the wife living at the same address is likely to take on the share of driving, designated driver etc so the risk is lower than myself, single, living on own.
With this in mind, the premium shot back up to £478, but dropped slightly to £470 with her as a named driver.
If thats the case, then spouse reduces policy more than a named driver, which makes sense on a risk basis. Of course, they dont ever have to drive, despite some people pretending they know what they are talking about saying they do.
However, as it seems the renewal shot up in price, hence op phoning insurer, begs the question (especially in today's market), why on earth did he not 'shop around'?
I do it annually now if needed. Renewal comes in (higher, naturally, always!). Get in touch, what's the reason for the hike, nothing has changed except (in my favour) I have another year's no claim? So, what's the best you can do? If lowered enough, fine, go ahead. If not, I'm off to shop around. I have always got a sometimes substantially better deal if my insurer won't drop it enough. Insurers don't care, they know the next one along will pay for what they lose with me!
Insurers also know the majority will just carry on, hence the renewal magic line, you 'don't need to do anything, so the money just goes out of your account' - what wallies!
I concede that a majority of motorists simply do not have the time, nor the inclination, to 'shop around'. We are all too busy leading hectic lives. But they are the same ones who complain about the cost of everything!
Mine is due in the New Year. The minute I get the renewal I will be on the phone (using their 'free' line, easily found if you have the time and inclination!). I'm betting it will have gone up at least a hundred quid or more. They just try it on. Because the know the majority will just sigh, moan, and pay up.
DON'T!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff