Help please - use of car which is not yours when bankrupt

AdvicePlease

Thank you O-O-D-N-O-O-D I really hadn't thought about what would happen after discharge but yes one of those options would happen I would imagine. I have been sitting here in tears all evening since I made the phone call, I cannot believe how generous he is being

debt_doctor

Good old Dad!

I echo some of which has been said, in particular that the paper trail of purchase, receipt, ownership by Dad and the fact that virtually all insurers require that the insured is the registered keeper, and some require they are the legal owner.
The v5 is keeper, not ownership, but is the starting point for the Insolvency Service, from then ownership will be on merits of the investigation.
If the insurance company insist on the policy holder being the legal owner then could Dad be policy holder with you as a named driver?

DD

AdvicePlease

debt_doctor wrote: »

Good old Dad!

I echo some of which has been said, in particular that the paper trail of purchase, receipt, ownership by Dad and the fact that virtually all insurers require that the insured is the registered keeper, and some require they are the legal owner.
The v5 is keeper, not ownership, but is the starting point for the Insolvency Service, from then ownership will be on merits of the investigation.
If the insurance company insist on the policy holder being the legal owner then could Dad be policy holder with you as a named driver?

DD

Thanks DD, I will be making sure the paperwork is absolutely water-tight on the ownership side if this does go ahead Unfortunately it isn't an option for my dad to be the policy holder, I will be the sole user of the car as my parents live 60 miles away from me

debt_doctor

AdvicePlease wrote: »

Thanks DD, I will be making sure the paperwork is absolutely water-tight on the ownership side if this does go ahead Unfortunately it isn't an option for my dad to be the policy holder, I will be the sole user of the car as my parents live 60 miles away from me

Why couldn't you be the sole user of the vehicle but the owner be also insured so they may drive their vehicle if they choose to do so?

DD

AdvicePlease

debt_doctor wrote: »

Why couldn't you be the sole user of the vehicle but the owner be also insured so they may drive their vehicle if they choose to do so?

DD

For insurance purposes I would have to be the insured person not a named person on the policy, as I would be the main driver of the vehicle? Otherwise it invalidates the policy I believe

PippaGirl_2

Yes, what debt doctor is suggesting is called fronting and is illegal.

You're right, the main driver has to be the policy holder.

valk_scot

Yes, you could be the main driver on the policy but also add your dad as an additional named driver if you both so wish. It may increase the premium slightly of course but if he's got a good driving record it won't be much.

tiggerbodhi

valk_scot wrote: »

Yes, you could be the main driver on the policy but also add your dad as an additional named driver if you both so wish. It may increase the premium slightly of course but if he's got a good driving record it won't be much.

Oddly if your dad has a clean accident free driving record putting him on as a second named driver can reduce premiums rather than increase it.

luvchocolate

just for reference I needed to add a friend to share the driving one weekend would have cost me £25......but if I added her on for the remaining time on the policy I actualy got a refund of £27.50!! I always have her on now!
Seriously though there are some very knowlegable people on here that have helped me through my dark times, read everything you can x

debt_doctor

PippaGirl wrote: »

Yes, what debt doctor is suggesting is called fronting and is illegal.

You're right, the main driver has to be the policy holder.

What I am suggesting is that the op be upfront about her / their situation with the insurance company concerned.
It is not a crime to request insurance that suits your needs.

To be deliberately misleading in an enquiry for insurance with a view to defraud is illegal.