Two policies, one vehicle?

vaio

SimonSays wrote: »

Not in the eyes of insurance. If they don't own it they don't have the insurable interest. Its like me insuring a wedding ring on my mates wifes finger!.......

Nah, being allowed to use a vehicle (whoever owns it) is enough of a benefit to create an insurable interest that you can protect by buying a policy. Insurable interest doesn't necessarily require ownership, all that is needed is some benefit.

......They will ask "Are you the registered owner and keeper" If she answers yes, Shes lied on a proposal form. If she answers no most will decline cover, due to no insurable interest.

Nope again, apart from there being no register of owners the idea that owner, RK & policy holder all need to be the same person is an assumption made to make the insurance software easy for most people. The number of cars out there where the owner is a finance or lease company means that any insurer who declined in those circumstance would be cutting themselves off from a lot of business.

As above, me lending you a car/lawnmower/whatever creates a benefit for you and thus an insurable interest that you can protect.

nobbysn*ts

SimonSays wrote: »

Not in the eyes of insurance. If they don't own it they don't have the insurable interest. Its like me insuring a wedding ring on my mates wifes finger!


They will ask "Are you the registered owner and keeper" If she answers yes, Shes lied on a proposal form. If she answers no most will decline cover, due to no insurable interest.

Nah, it's more like her insuring a ring you lent them, and want back one day, but if they lose it, you'd want them to replace it. As to the car, they'll ask "who is the owner and registered keeper", as they indeed did. It was still insured on their policy, them as main driver, with no problems when they answered, truthfully, "dad", They do indeed have an insurable interest.

thenudeone

SimonSays wrote: »

One fact of the matter is, If the daughter gets her own policy of just her She wouldn't be able to prove Insurable Interest?

Of course there is an insurable interest. How do you think temporary short-term car insurance works?

rs65

SimonSays wrote: »

Because she isn't the owner or keeper of the vehicle

I'm sorry but you are wrong - and you are not helping the OP.

System

rs65 wrote: »

I'm sorry but you are wrong - and you are not helping the OP.

All this insurable interest discussion is irrelevant. She's not taking out the policy because she is not the main driver. It is my car, my policy, and I am the main driver.


Advice here seems definite that the theoretical concept of "main driver under a particular policy" does not exist..eg if I drive the car 6 days a week and do 100 miles, but my daughter borrows it on saturday morning and drives 10 miles on a different policy, she is not the main driver, even though the main beneficiary of that policy.

So it comes back to the basic points:
This is not illegal.
It may not necesarily be acceptable to each insurer, so would need checking.
It might cause problems sorting out who pays in the event of a claim.
I would to some extent lose the benefit of agreed value.

Quentin

Main driver per policy does exist!

Q.Why did you buy a second policy and keep first one?

A. So daughter could drive on it as my other insurer won't accept her.

So she is the main driver as far as the second policy is concerned

System

Quentin wrote: »

So she is the main driver as far as the second policy is concerned

That's the situation I was postulating some while back. rs65 seemed to disagree, and said that "main driver" can only mean in terms of proportion physical use of the car.

So you are really saying it is possible to have two main drivers on the same car under different policies?


If that is the case then obviously the plan fails, because she would have to have the policy in her own name, and I would be a subsidiary named driver. (albeit covering more miles ! So she would be fronting me, in order to secure a more expensive premium - the mind boggles ))