Two insurance policies on one car?
Discussion
Bought daughter 1 a nice little Yaris a couple of years ago when she passed her test. She got a policy on it with me as a named driver.
Daughter 2 will be (hopefully) passing her test soon and I'm in a bit of a quandary about getting her insured on the Yaris too.
If D2 goes on D1's policy as a named driver then she won't start accruing her own NCD.
If D2 takes out her own policy, it isn't illegal but all the insurance companies seem very much against it.
Is there a better way of doing this. Or is it just one of those things
Daughter 2 will be (hopefully) passing her test soon and I'm in a bit of a quandary about getting her insured on the Yaris too.
If D2 goes on D1's policy as a named driver then she won't start accruing her own NCD.
If D2 takes out her own policy, it isn't illegal but all the insurance companies seem very much against it.
Is there a better way of doing this. Or is it just one of those things
Find the cheapest main driver quote for your second daughter, then insure her as another named driver. Subtract the cost of the named driver quote from the full quote and put the difference in a high interest account.
After a year, I’d be fairly sure that the money in the bank would outweigh the effect that a year’s NCD would have had on the premium to then pay for a dedicated policy (which would be extraordinarily cheaper, due to the insurers wariness about drivers who have just passed their tests).
You can of course rinse and repeat with this strategy, but the main point is that NCDs aren’t necessarily the most important thing to worry about.
After a year, I’d be fairly sure that the money in the bank would outweigh the effect that a year’s NCD would have had on the premium to then pay for a dedicated policy (which would be extraordinarily cheaper, due to the insurers wariness about drivers who have just passed their tests).
You can of course rinse and repeat with this strategy, but the main point is that NCDs aren’t necessarily the most important thing to worry about.
No claims is a bit of a con, driving experience and record will count for as much. Do some predictive quotes for her in 2 years time with no NCB and 2 years good driving, and with 2 years NCB. You may be surprised, it is certainly the case for older drivers, may be very different for young drivers though.
boyse7en said:
Bought daughter 1 a nice little Yaris a couple of years ago when she passed her test. She got a policy on it with me as a named driver.
Daughter 2 will be (hopefully) passing her test soon and I'm in a bit of a quandary about getting her insured on the Yaris too.
If D2 goes on D1's policy as a named driver then she won't start accruing her own NCD.
If D2 takes out her own policy, it isn't illegal but all the insurance companies seem very much against it.
Is there a better way of doing this. Or is it just one of those things
It’s certainly not illegal but as you say not all Insurers will agree to it. Daughter 2 will be (hopefully) passing her test soon and I'm in a bit of a quandary about getting her insured on the Yaris too.
If D2 goes on D1's policy as a named driver then she won't start accruing her own NCD.
If D2 takes out her own policy, it isn't illegal but all the insurance companies seem very much against it.
Is there a better way of doing this. Or is it just one of those things
Does / will D1 own the car or do you ?
It might be possible to get D1 and D2 a joint policy but with D2 as the named driver but obviously that also depends on who will genuinely be doing the most miles.
The NCB thing is real and generally it’s about getting young drivers to that first year.
One reason we went with Admiral for all of ours as they give one year irrespective of when in the year the test is passed.
I would probably try and speak to a broker and let them do the work ( it won’t cost you ) and just explain the situation and let them find the right Insurer / right price.
The biggest problem with 2 separate policies is that in the event of a claim on one policy, both policies may pay out.
In ye olden days of paper claim forms there was always a question asking if the car was covered by another policy. These days they can check MID for dual insurance.
So what could happen is that there is a total loss of £10K and each policy pays £5k, less the excess on each policy. So your ONE accident has led to TWO claims on TWO policies and TWO lots of excess deducted. Note that this is different on day insure policies who take the who liability.
In ye olden days of paper claim forms there was always a question asking if the car was covered by another policy. These days they can check MID for dual insurance.
So what could happen is that there is a total loss of £10K and each policy pays £5k, less the excess on each policy. So your ONE accident has led to TWO claims on TWO policies and TWO lots of excess deducted. Note that this is different on day insure policies who take the who liability.
We've got two separate policies on my mum's car, have had it for a few years now. One is for her and the other is for me and my sister. We have this as it means either if us can drive her when needed, especially if she has a medical episode while out. Both insurers know and are fine with it as whoever is driving at the time dictates which insurer is on the hook if anything happens. It's far cheaper this way for some reason, we think it's due to my mum's health issues but not sure. Mum's policy is £900 this year and to add me and my sister doubles it whereas having us on a separate policy costs us £130 for the year. Both policies have a 3000 mile limit (the lowest they could do) and as the car rarely does more than 2000 between MOTs it's more than ample. Mum is with Direct Line (one of the few that would even quote for her) and me and my sister are via Sheila's Wheels who I also insure my car with. Never had to make a claim for mum's car though so I don't know how difficult it could be in that scenario!
Don't put two policies on one car. Insurance companies have the ability to share information and specifically tell you this when you take out a policy. They might not actually check the detail unless and until something goes wrong.
There's no point risking a situation where both policies get kicked out and nobody's achieved anything.
"Key UK Car Insurance Databases & Sharing Systems
• Motor Insurance Database (MID): The central record of all insured vehicles in the UK, used by the police (via ANPR) and the DVLA to verify insurance status. Public checks can be made using askMID.
• Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE): A national database run via the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) holding a 6-to-7-year history of motor, home, and personal injury claims or reported incidents. Insurers check this during underwriting to assess risk."
There's no point risking a situation where both policies get kicked out and nobody's achieved anything.
"Key UK Car Insurance Databases & Sharing Systems
• Motor Insurance Database (MID): The central record of all insured vehicles in the UK, used by the police (via ANPR) and the DVLA to verify insurance status. Public checks can be made using askMID.
• Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE): A national database run via the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) holding a 6-to-7-year history of motor, home, and personal injury claims or reported incidents. Insurers check this during underwriting to assess risk."
Panamax said:
Don't put two policies on one car. Insurance companies have the ability to share information and specifically tell you this when you take out a policy. They might not actually check the detail unless and until something goes wrong.
There's no point risking a situation where both policies get kicked out and nobody's achieved anything.
"Key UK Car Insurance Databases & Sharing Systems
Motor Insurance Database (MID): The central record of all insured vehicles in the UK, used by the police (via ANPR) and the DVLA to verify insurance status. Public checks can be made using askMID.
Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE): A national database run via the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) holding a 6-to-7-year history of motor, home, and personal injury claims or reported incidents. Insurers check this during underwriting to assess risk."
So information is shared, so what?There's no point risking a situation where both policies get kicked out and nobody's achieved anything.
"Key UK Car Insurance Databases & Sharing Systems
Motor Insurance Database (MID): The central record of all insured vehicles in the UK, used by the police (via ANPR) and the DVLA to verify insurance status. Public checks can be made using askMID.
Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE): A national database run via the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) holding a 6-to-7-year history of motor, home, and personal injury claims or reported incidents. Insurers check this during underwriting to assess risk."
Why would both policies get kicked out? (As long as you didn't try to claim on them both at the same time!)
aterribleusername said:
We've got two separate policies on my mum's car, have had it for a few years now. One is for her and the other is for me and my sister. We have this as it means either if us can drive her when needed, especially if she has a medical episode while out. Both insurers know and are fine with it as whoever is driving at the time dictates which insurer is on the hook if anything happens. It's far cheaper this way for some reason, we think it's due to my mum's health issues but not sure. Mum's policy is £900 this year and to add me and my sister doubles it whereas having us on a separate policy costs us £130 for the year. Both policies have a 3000 mile limit (the lowest they could do) and as the car rarely does more than 2000 between MOTs it's more than ample. Mum is with Direct Line (one of the few that would even quote for her) and me and my sister are via Sheila's Wheels who I also insure my car with. Never had to make a claim for mum's car though so I don't know how difficult it could be in that scenario!
Interesting. I wonder what would happen if the car was stolen or vandalised or driven into when unattended?Mike Legerwood said:
I wonder what would happen if the car was stolen or vandalised or driven into when unattended?
Presumably the car itself is insured by the "owner". An insurance policy on an asset you don't own is generally void as as a wager. In other words, gambling on whether a future event may happen when the punter has no ownership interest in the subject-matter of the bet. For instance, taking out a fire insurance policy on your neighbour's house because you think it might burn down and you could pocket some cash.It's the "third party liability" aspect which can be covered once for the liabilities of one driver and once for the liabilities of another. They are two different risks. This situation occurs pretty much every time someone drives a car they don't own under the "driving other cars" wording of a policy (where present).
boyse7en said:
If D2 goes on D1's policy as a named driver then she won't start accruing her own NCD.
Why is this a problem?By paying for a second insurance policy on the car now, you are essentially paying twice what you need to pay this year, in order to get a (fairly small) discount on next year's premium. Potentially you are going to keep doing that for several years, if it's going to be a while before D2 gets her own car. By that time, her premium is going to have come down considerably, NCD or no NCD, just on account of her being a few years older and having held her licence a few years longer. So you're paying maybe 100% extra on top of a large premium this year, in order to get maybe a 25% discount on a smaller premium some years down the line. Why would you want to do that?
Accruing her own NCD is massively overrated. To be honest from a purely financial point of view, by far and away the best thing that she can do when she passes her test is to leave her driving licence in the back of a drawer and forget that it exists for a couple of years. Failing that though, do whatever works out cheapest for this year's insurance, and worry about her NCD if and when she gets a car if her own.
My daughter lives mostly overseas. Thailand gap year and now Portugal for uni.
She was 17 and a vw up in Surrey post test was £1200.
The policy was cancelled when she went overseas.
1 year later and she is 18 and the policy ( same insurer ) was £550. This one I have not cancelled at is is cheap and I can take it for an mot etc
My son is 17 in April and I will get a learner policy for him (£150 ish last time ) and then likely put him on as a named driver for a few months once passed until renewal ( him being main driver will be declared )
So i can't see that ncd has much to do with it.
She was 17 and a vw up in Surrey post test was £1200.
The policy was cancelled when she went overseas.
1 year later and she is 18 and the policy ( same insurer ) was £550. This one I have not cancelled at is is cheap and I can take it for an mot etc
My son is 17 in April and I will get a learner policy for him (£150 ish last time ) and then likely put him on as a named driver for a few months once passed until renewal ( him being main driver will be declared )
So i can't see that ncd has much to do with it.
Panamax said:
Presumably the car itself is insured by the "owner". An insurance policy on an asset you don't own is generally void as as a wager. In other words, gambling on whether a future event may happen when the punter has no ownership interest in the subject-matter of the bet. For instance, taking out a fire insurance policy on your neighbour's house because you think it might burn down and you could pocket some cash.
It's the "third party liability" aspect which can be covered once for the liabilities of one driver and once for the liabilities of another. They are two different risks. This situation occurs pretty much every time someone drives a car they don't own under the "driving other cars" wording of a policy (where present).
I don't think that's always true.It's the "third party liability" aspect which can be covered once for the liabilities of one driver and once for the liabilities of another. They are two different risks. This situation occurs pretty much every time someone drives a car they don't own under the "driving other cars" wording of a policy (where present).
You can insure a car which belongs to a finance company.
You crash it, the finance company gets paid.
You can borrow my car, and insure yourself against the risk of crashing it and needing to get it repaired.
You do have a stake in it, you risk owing me a car that you've borrowed and trashed.
In theory, you can insure against any risk. Whether a standard policy is designed to do that is another question.
What you can't generally do is set yourself up to be better off, by potentially trashing the car and pocketing the payout, leaving the owner worse off.
Message Board | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff