Tips/Advice finding insurance for 18 year old just passed his Test

AdrianC

Just for clarity, "25+" for a classic would normally mean the age of the driver, rather than the car.

It's entirely possible that you'll get a classic policy on something younger than that, so early Freelanders - 1997 launch, 19yrs ago - wouldn't be impossible. A Merc 190? Launched 34yrs ago, replaced by the C-class 23yrs ago? Easily.

But an 18yo driver...? Nope. Not happening.

Nasqueron

Let's be realistic, a newly passed driver wants a hot hatch (fair enough if he wants the diesel, I would change my opinion) - probably the 120+BHP petrol, at 8k + 2.2k on black box insurance - assuming he wants the petrol, he's not getting it for a sensible runaround to build a NCB, he wants something to race around in, probably fit a stupid plastic spoiler and loud exhaust and will end up upside down in a field, that's if Tesco haven't refused to insure due to the tracking data showing poor driving. If he wants a fancy car, he can get one in a year or two, should get a sensible low power cheap to insure job, run it, get the NCB and then upgrade when he's shown he's a sensible driver and mature enough to drive that car.

What is more likely is OP buys the car and pays the insurance (doubt an 18 year old has 10k lying around) and comes back in 6 months wanting to know how to deal with an increased premium due to the black box data

jimjames

Aubrey_Thicket wrote: »

jimjames


Not correct. I went on Autotrader and saw a vehicle for sale exactly as he wants. Vehicle was £8,000. Tesco Box insurance is £2200

Wow! That seems incredibly low for insurance, they obviously see a lower risk. Knowing myself at 18, I'd have been hugely dangerous in a sporty car much as many young lads. Fortunately a 950 Fiesta didn't have too much scope for going fast.

AdrianC wrote: »

Just for clarity, "25+" for a classic would normally mean the age of the driver, rather than the car.

Yes, absolutely. Corrected it now. My Puma is on classic policy and is 2000 model so 16 years old. Age of car seems flexible depending on the insurer and vehicle.

BeenThroughItAll

AdrianC wrote: »

Just for clarity, "25+" for a classic would normally mean the age of the driver, rather than the car.

It's entirely possible that you'll get a classic policy on something younger than that, so early Freelanders - 1997 launch, 19yrs ago - wouldn't be impossible. A Merc 190? Launched 34yrs ago, replaced by the C-class 23yrs ago? Easily.

But an 18yo driver...? Nope. Not happening.

Not these days, perhaps, but my first car aged 17 was a white 27yo Triumph Herald 1200, KHJ825E, sadly long since ruined by a subsequent owner. It was insured for the princely sum of £271 for the year through Footman James on an agreed value policy, with a maximum 8K per year mileage, and as my only, day-to-day driver.

Bet you won't get that deal now though.

caliew

Hi I have worked in insurance for a number of years and I have just left due to childcare reasons and I also have an older son who is 18. He passed his text first time and being in insurance at the time I thought 'oh no' but basically its not that bad, I did not put him with the company I worked for at the time as unfortunately they don't specialise in young drivers. And from experience I knew at the time to go on an aggregator site (comparison site) as that is where the maximum discounts tend to be. On that Ingenie came up my son has been with them for 6 months and it has seemed to be going well. He has had to have a telematics box installed and he is building up his own audit trail of no claims bonus, as parents we have no involvement as a named drivers etc. the reason being is because if my son has a bump that could affect our insurance and also it could be considered as 'fronting' which could be deemed as illegal (so its recommended not to follow posts saying put parents on as named drivers). My son has just gone for something low spec its a Kia Picanto but anything with a small engine would be useful Toyota Aygo etc - as long as he understands its his first car and beggars cannot be choosers especially when a student (that's what I put to my son, your son might have different circumstances), I am sure when my son gets out to work properly he will change for a higher spec. vehicle but hey that's his problem then. Hope this information helps for your son.

jimjames

caliew wrote: »

as parents we have no involvement as a named drivers etc. the reason being is because if my son has a bump that could affect our insurance and also it could be considered as 'fronting' which could be deemed as illegal (so its recommended not to follow posts saying put parents on as named drivers).

I don't get the logic here. Fronting is the parent taking out the policy and it being the child who is the main driver. There is nothing illegal about adding additional drivers who are clearly listed as occasional drivers and not the main one.

For someone who worked in insurance for years, can you explain why there would be an issue with a parent being added to any policy taken out by their child if the child is main driver & policyholder? Or for that matter, any policy having additional drivers added to it?

rs65

caliew wrote: »

as parents we have no involvement as a named drivers etc. the reason being is because if my son has a bump that could affect our insurance and also it could be considered as 'fronting' which could be deemed as illegal (so its recommended not to follow posts saying put parents on as named drivers).

Rubbish.

If your son has a bump and claims on his policy it would not affect named drivers.

Parents being added as named drivers to children's policies is not fronting.

fred246

My Fiesta is owned and registered by myself. With LV you then add named drivers and then tick a box to nominate the main driver. Making my son the main driver was £30 more than me or my wife being the main driver. Nobody uses the car daily and with a new driver you've no idea how much they will use it. I hope that by paying the £30 we could never be accused of 'fronting', although he probably isn't the main driver. He won't get any NCB but he will be at least 25 before he has his own car anyway.

rudekid48

caliew wrote: »

Hi I have worked in insurance for a number of years and I have just left due to childcare reasons and I also have an older son who is 18. He passed his text first time and being in insurance at the time I thought 'oh no' but basically its not that bad, I did not put him with the company I worked for at the time as unfortunately they don't specialise in young drivers. And from experience I knew at the time to go on an aggregator site (comparison site) as that is where the maximum discounts tend to be. On that Ingenie came up my son has been with them for 6 months and it has seemed to be going well. He has had to have a telematics box installed and he is building up his own audit trail of no claims bonus, as parents we have no involvement as a named drivers etc. the reason being is because if my son has a bump that could affect our insurance and also it could be considered as 'fronting' which could be deemed as illegal (so its recommended not to follow posts saying put parents on as named drivers). My son has just gone for something low spec its a Kia Picanto but anything with a small engine would be useful Toyota Aygo etc - as long as he understands its his first car and beggars cannot be choosers especially when a student (that's what I put to my son, your son might have different circumstances), I am sure when my son gets out to work properly he will change for a higher spec. vehicle but hey that's his problem then. Hope this information helps for your son.

Absolute tosh. This is not the first time that you have posted this rubbish about having parents as named drivers being 'fronting' - you are 100% WRONG and should stop posting such bad advice.

OP please ignore this drivel.

jimjames

rudekid48 wrote: »

Absolute tosh. This is not the first time that you have posted this rubbish about having parents as named drivers being 'fronting' - you are 100% WRONG and should stop posting such bad advice.

OP please ignore this drivel.

Pretty shocking that someone claiming to work in insurance should post such inaccurate info. Wonder if it's just said to attempt to give credibility or working in insurance actually meant cleaning an insurance office