Insuring a car I dont own and more....

vectrex

Ok... my 25 year old son has asked me if the following is possible...I haven't a clue if it is possible or legal etc...so Im hoping for some advice here!


He is the registered owner of a vehicle... he has asked me If I can insure his vehicle....but with him as the named driver. He's been driving for less than a year and doesn't live at home.


The car is SORN at the moment without tax mot and insurance....so he needs insurance to be able to get it to the garage to get it motd and taxed.

marlot

A garage could collect it on trade plates or a transporter to do the MOT.

Be careful that you don't commit 'fronting' - where the insurance company believe you are the main driver. Also be aware that any accident your son has would have to be reported to your insurance company also.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/oct/14/fronting-car-insurance-costs-parents

rs65

vectrex wrote: »

.so he needs insurance to be able to get it to the garage to get it motd and taxed.

The question is ... why ask you? Why isn't he insuring it himself?

Norman_Castle

He is the registered owner of a vehicle... he has asked me If I can insure his vehicle....but with him as the named driver. He's been driving for less than a year and doesn't live at home.

Once insured, who will be driving the car most often?.

Retrogamer

I'd recommend not committing fraud by putting yourself as the main driver or owner if you are not the main driver or owner.

Too many tales of woe on here and various motoring forums of the consequences of fronting.

He can get insurance for 1 day to go to MOT centre and back, or "potentially" someone who is fully comp and has permission to drive other cars regardless if they are insured or not could take it there for him and back. Make sure MOT is pre booked.

dacouch

He's proposing you "Front" for him to save him money, this would involve you taking a policy out in your name with his as a named driver.

As the policy is taken out in your name it is you that is committing the fraud.

It's a very easy matter for the Insurers to discover in your case as the car is registered in your sons name, I assume it was bought in his name so bank / car dealer records will show him buying the car, the car is not kept at your home, I assume he will use the car to drive to work and I assume you have your own car in your own name. These are all things an Insurer checks when they suspect you're fronting for a younger driver.

If you're caught fronting, the Insurers will seek to recover any claims they have to pay out to third parties from you personally (They likely won't cover the damage to your sons own car), possibility of being reported to the police for fraud (This is fairly rare). The Insurers will also void / cancel the policy, this will mean you (And possibly your wife depending on the policy) will need to declare to future Insurers including motor, house hold and life insurance that you've had a policy voided / cancelled which makes it very very difficult (Very expensive) to obtain Insurance

JJ1987

some insurance companies only quote for the registered keeper of the car

System

dacouch wrote: »

As the policy is taken out in your name it is you that is committing the fraud.

The fraud would be if you pretend to be the main driver. If you are not the main driver there is no fraud.

There is nothing illegal about a non-driver taking out insurance for a car mainly driven by someone else, if you can find insurers who will cover it.
In my experience they can be quite relaxed about family-owned cars used by a variety of drivers, BUT you must honestly declare who is the main driver.
If there is any doubt as to the definition of main driver, I don't see how you can go wrong by putting down the most risky person?

InsideInsurance

The above is correct but the issue is that most websites dont give you the option to declare who the main driver is and simply assumes its the policyholder in which case it is fronting and thus fraud.

If they buy over the telephone rather than online they can declare who the main driver is and then stay on the right side of the law.

vectrex

Yeah I would not be driving it at all... he asked me to insure it with him as the named driver.


I wouldn't go ahead unless it was 100% legal....just from googling around it isn't that clear if it is or isn't legal.... but the later responses are what ive seen... saying it is legal if you can find an insurer that will accept those circumstances.

mgdavid

rs65 wrote: »

The question is ... why ask you? Why isn't he insuring it himself?

^^^ this.
Why can't he insure it?
Why is he giving you the problem and all the work & hasssle of hunting around to find a special situation insurer, when he could just insure it like normal people do?