Can I insure my son as a named driver on my car.......
Discussion
As with the others , my partner is insured to drive her parents' car , and they live 150 miles away ; likewise I am named on my sister's policy and my daughter on mine - both live 80 miles away ( and daughter has only had 'a shot' of driving mine once ) but we are all insured - just in case .
It is worth mentioning the distance and the probable infrequency of driving since the additional premium will be negligible .
GF was £1.50 extra on her parents policy for their Astra ; 25 YO daughter was an extra £20 on my S Class .
It is worth mentioning the distance and the probable infrequency of driving since the additional premium will be negligible .
GF was £1.50 extra on her parents policy for their Astra ; 25 YO daughter was an extra £20 on my S Class .
saaby93 said:
Scelto said:
Furberger said:
Cue: "That's insurance fronting and your insurance is now invalid!!!11!!"
Which would be completely wrong, given the details in the original post.It's all in the big print

Sorry I'm confused. I've never been asked where my named drivers live, or how many miles they will do in the car. I have my dad as a named driver, and I tell my insurer that I rent privately, so why do I need to tell them I don't live at home. Every policy he has been on he has driven the car but normally only for a couple of miles, since he makes the policy much cheaper I ensure he drives the car to make sure his being on the policy can't be seen as fraud.
A named driver not actually driving the car isn't fraud. The fraud occurs when the person insured as the main driver of the car, isn't the main driver.
Nick3point2 said:
Sorry I'm confused. I've never been asked where my named drivers live, or how many miles they will do in the car. I have my dad as a named driver, and I tell my insurer that I rent privately, so why do I need to tell them I don't live at home. Every policy he has been on he has driven the car but normally only for a couple of miles, since he makes the policy much cheaper I ensure he drives the car to make sure his being on the policy can't be seen as fraud.
A named driver not actually driving the car isn't fraud. The fraud occurs when the person insured as the main driver of the car, isn't the main driver.There is absolutely no problem having an infrequent driver as a named driver, since that is precisely what it is for. I have added a parent as a named driver onto most of my recent policies, since it dropped the premium, and it's good they have the option of driving it full comp if required. I can't see there is any requirement for a named driver to ever actually drive the vehicle.
saaby93 said:
Scelto said:
Furberger said:
Cue: "That's insurance fronting and your insurance is now invalid!!!11!!"
Which would be completely wrong, given the details in the original post.Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff


