Named driver crash my car - I have no details of what happen
Discussion
jamieduff1981 said:
To answer the question since nobody else has, "Fronting" is the practise of someone low risk (such as you) taking out a car insurance policy pretending to be the main driver in order for a named driver, whom the insurer understands to be an occassional user of the insured car, to use the car most of the time.
Common examples would be e.g. a teenage male driving round in "his" car but the insurance is in his mother's name and the insurer believes she is the main driver, because the insurance costs much less for a 40something mum as the main driver. This is a breach of contract with the insurer and where higher-risk named drivers crash the car, the insurer will explore this to find out not just who was actually driving but who really was the main user of the car.
The basis which needs to be understood is that the insurer either would have charged a much higher premium had they known the higher risk driver was really the person normally driving the car, or perhaps would have refused insurance for them entirely.
In your case your insurer will want to clarify that this banged up car was really your car, that it was really you who normally drove it, and it was normally parked outside your house for you to use, and that your brother simply borrowed it and crashed it. The bad outcome for you will be if the insurer realises that whilst it was your insurance policy, the car was mainly being used by your brother, wasn't normally parked outside your house, and that the insurance was in your name for convenience or because it seemed a cheaper way to get your brother insured.
Thank you for explaining. The car was mainly used by myself but my brother would use it every now and again. He has another car (no on this insurance) which he used. I don’t know how I would proved this but I’ll suppose I just have to wait till it comes to that point. Common examples would be e.g. a teenage male driving round in "his" car but the insurance is in his mother's name and the insurer believes she is the main driver, because the insurance costs much less for a 40something mum as the main driver. This is a breach of contract with the insurer and where higher-risk named drivers crash the car, the insurer will explore this to find out not just who was actually driving but who really was the main user of the car.
The basis which needs to be understood is that the insurer either would have charged a much higher premium had they known the higher risk driver was really the person normally driving the car, or perhaps would have refused insurance for them entirely.
In your case your insurer will want to clarify that this banged up car was really your car, that it was really you who normally drove it, and it was normally parked outside your house for you to use, and that your brother simply borrowed it and crashed it. The bad outcome for you will be if the insurer realises that whilst it was your insurance policy, the car was mainly being used by your brother, wasn't normally parked outside your house, and that the insurance was in your name for convenience or because it seemed a cheaper way to get your brother insured.
jamieduff1981 said:
To answer the question since nobody else has, "Fronting" is the practise of someone low risk (such as you) taking out a car insurance policy pretending to be the main driver in order for a named driver, whom the insurer understands to be an occassional user of the insured car, to use the car most of the time.
Common examples would be e.g. a teenage male driving round in "his" car but the insurance is in his mother's name and the insurer believes she is the main driver, because the insurance costs much less for a 40something mum as the main driver. This is a breach of contract with the insurer and where higher-risk named drivers crash the car, the insurer will explore this to find out not just who was actually driving but who really was the main user of the car.
The basis which needs to be understood is that the insurer either would have charged a much higher premium had they known the higher risk driver was really the person normally driving the car, or perhaps would have refused insurance for them entirely.
In your case your insurer will want to clarify that this banged up car was really your car, that it was really you who normally drove it, and it was normally parked outside your house for you to use, and that your brother simply borrowed it and crashed it. The bad outcome for you will be if the insurer realises that whilst it was your insurance policy, the car was mainly being used by your brother, wasn't normally parked outside your house, and that the insurance was in your name for convenience or because it seemed a cheaper way to get your brother insured.
Thank you for explaining. The car was mainly used by myself but my brother would use it every now and again. He has another car (no on this insurance) which he used. I don’t know how I would proved this but I’ll suppose I just have to wait till it comes to that point. Common examples would be e.g. a teenage male driving round in "his" car but the insurance is in his mother's name and the insurer believes she is the main driver, because the insurance costs much less for a 40something mum as the main driver. This is a breach of contract with the insurer and where higher-risk named drivers crash the car, the insurer will explore this to find out not just who was actually driving but who really was the main user of the car.
The basis which needs to be understood is that the insurer either would have charged a much higher premium had they known the higher risk driver was really the person normally driving the car, or perhaps would have refused insurance for them entirely.
In your case your insurer will want to clarify that this banged up car was really your car, that it was really you who normally drove it, and it was normally parked outside your house for you to use, and that your brother simply borrowed it and crashed it. The bad outcome for you will be if the insurer realises that whilst it was your insurance policy, the car was mainly being used by your brother, wasn't normally parked outside your house, and that the insurance was in your name for convenience or because it seemed a cheaper way to get your brother insured.
CanAm said:
I dont know much about criminal law, but I'm surprised that a motoring offence would be in breach of the brother's probation conditions, resulting in immediate imprisonment. And despite having a car of his own, he apparently just turned up and drove away in the OP's car without even mentioning it to her. I am a named driver on my son's car, but I would never drive it without asking him first.
Never said I wasn’t aware he had the car! LivLL said:
If you ever wonder why car insurance is so expensive.......
OP, why would you collect a "completely damaged......total write off" from the Police pound?
Just tell your insurance what you know, where the car is and leave it up to them to sort things out. That's why we pay so much, no to go chasing round yourself.
p.s. Is your brother injured?
I’ve contacted my insurance. Just waiting to hear back.
I’m not sure if my brother is injured and he wasn’t taken to hospital but his a big guy in a small car so I’m guessing it must be some scraps and bruises.
Unreal said:
No it’s not Thank you all who has given advise (not those who given their judgemental views!). I’m not a fraudster and just wanted advise as I had no information about the accident. Since my 1st post I have got more of the story and I have contacted my insurance who will be getting back to me about the next stages.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff