Named driver crash my car - I have no details of what happen
Discussion
Unreal said:
mubariz said:
Unreal said:
justamumof3 said:
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.
mubariz said:
Unreal said:
mubariz said:
Unreal said:
justamumof3 said:
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.
I'm sure if the OP has told the truth he has nothing to worry about.
justamumof3 said:
He wasn't locked up for the crash. He was on probation (for another matter) and was recalled back to prison. If you are on probation, any kind of arrest can get you locked up. That is the reason why I can’t not speak with him and get the whole story from him
They have phones in jails for cons. If he chooses not to call there isn't much you can do. Report to insurance with what info you have. They can get info from the police.justamumof3 said:
I am the main policyholder on a car and I Also had a name driver on my policy. Over the weekend I received a call from the police to say that they found my vehicle crashed and that it was at the police pound and I needed to recover it. He said he couldn’t give me any information or even tell me if the name driver is okay or where he is. I arranged for the car to be collected. It’s completely damaged and looks like a total write of. I managed to find that the driver was arrested and remanded in jail. Again, no one‘s given much information about what actually happened. However I did manage to find out that the only driving charge is reckless driving and he didn’t hit anyone (not sure what that mean as surely you would have hit something). I don’t have no information and I don’t have any ways yet if contacting the named driver. My question is what do I tell my Insurance? They are going to want to speak with him but his in jail right now. I don’t know when it happened, the time, where it happened, what happened!!! I’m so worried as the car still in finance.
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?
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.
Pit Pony said:
Hilts said:
Pit Pony said:
justamumof3 said:
Pit Pony said:
Given how difficult it is for people with unspent criminal convictions to obtain insurance, my caution about your insurance company looking at the future claim, in great detail, is even more pertinent.
Ok. I can’t even remember them asking this question I reckon 150 quotes at least. ALWAYS asked about None motoring convictions for all drivers.
Unreal said:
mubariz said:
Unreal said:
mubariz said:
Unreal said:
justamumof3 said:
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.
I'm sure if the OP has told the truth he has nothing to worry about.
Thread is PH at it's most typical and depressing.
What's wrong with just giving a poster straightforward, non judgemental advice? Why the need to project your own hobby horse of choice onto the OP?
They're not the greatest at written communication, what does that matter.
Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
What's wrong with just giving a poster straightforward, non judgemental advice? Why the need to project your own hobby horse of choice onto the OP?
They're not the greatest at written communication, what does that matter.
Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
charltjr said:
Thread is PH at it's most typical and depressing.
What's wrong with just giving a poster straightforward, non judgemental advice? Why the need to project your own hobby horse of choice onto the OP?
They're not the greatest at written communication, what does that matter.
Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
This I agree with. The OP has come on here to ask for advice. Some people have given sensible advice in that you only have limited information, so relay that to your Insurer who have been paid the premium to do the legwork.What's wrong with just giving a poster straightforward, non judgemental advice? Why the need to project your own hobby horse of choice onto the OP?
They're not the greatest at written communication, what does that matter.
Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
The OP has put her brother on the policy as a named driver and confirmed that it's her main car and he occasionally uses it (and has his own vehicle) and all sorts of comments about fronting etc.
There is a small concern about declaring his criminal record. If you go onto a comparison website and tick yes to a criminal record for any driver, then some websites will automatically no-quote, or if they do only a handful of Insurers will quote.
The OP's brother has been recalled to prison, so would have been on a licence and the only motoring charge she knows of is dangerous driving. It could be likely that there are other charges relating to behaviour or possession/supply that have absolutely nailed his recall.
I feel for the OP. A mum, with 3 kids, being shafted by a family member and now carless.
Unreal said:
It's meat and drink to an investigator but since I despise fronting I won't give any examples of what they might do, even if some should be obvious.
What a useless post.If you have information that you want to share then do so. If you don't want to share the information, then why bother posting?
justamumof3 said:
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! Mandat said:
Unreal said:
It's meat and drink to an investigator but since I despise fronting I won't give any examples of what they might do, even if some should be obvious.
What a useless post.If you have information that you want to share then do so. If you don't want to share the information, then why bother posting?
I have plenty of information I don't want to share. A public forum would be the last place I'd want to provide helpful advice to fraudsters. I despise fronting, as should any honest person and as I said, if the OP has been truthful they have nothing to worry about.
No-one has accused them of anything and they'll get even more help if they provide more information.
For example:
Did they declare the other driver's record, including their unspent criminal record?
Does the other driver have a car insured in their own name with their own record similarly declared?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff