Can my son's mother insure his car if the car is not insured?

drjunk

Hi. Can a vehicle be insured by someone that doesn't have the car registered in there name? And is it legal to have this as the only insurance policy on the car?

I bought a car for my son's 18th birthday. His mother wants to insure it though, and add my son as a driver to her policy.

Ebe_Scrooge

It's perfectly legal for the insurance policyholder to be different to the registered owner.

However - and this is a very important point - if your son is the main driver, he needs it to be insured in his name. By all means, add his mother as a named driver (this usually brings the premiums down), but if your son is the main driver then he must be declared as such. To have his mother as the the main driver, with him as a named driver when he's actually the main driver, is called "fronting", and will lead to all sorts of trouble if found out. The "fronting" thing is designed specifically to prevent exactly this situation - having a child driving as a named driver on his parent's policy purely to get cheaper insurance.

drjunk

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

It's perfectly legal for the insurance policyholder to be different to the registered owner.

However - and this is a very important point - if your son is the main driver, he needs it to be insured in hist name. By all means, add his mother as a named driver (this usually brings the premiums down), but if your son is the main driver then he must be declared as such. To have his mother as the the main driver, with him as a named driver when he's actually the main driver, is called "fronting", and will lead to all sorts of trouble if found out. The "fronting" thing is designed specifically to prevent exactly this situation - having a child driving as a named driver on his parent's policy purely to get cheaper insurance.

He is still learning to drive, so she will probably be using it the most. Until he has passed.

Ebe_Scrooge

drjunk wrote: »

He is still learning to drive, so she will probably be using it the most. Until he has passed.

Ah, in that case, no problem. It's when he comes to passing his test and being the main driver that he'll really need his own policy.

It's well worth shopping around for the learner insurance. When my son started to learn, I tried to add him onto my Direct Line policy and was quoted a ridiculous figure, I ended up switching to someone else for a year. DL had always been the cheapest by some margin for me (and continue to be so now my son is not included - and yes, I shop around every year), but I've heard that they're one of those companies that simply do not like to insure learners - perhaps that's why they're generally good value for us older drivers ? Anyway, whatever the case, it's well worth shopping around.

forgotmyname

Online quotes may assume she is the owner AND registered keeper, she needs to make sure the quotes given are not based on that.

When he passes his test the insurer she chooses may say no thanks or hike the premium massively.

Hermione_Granger

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

It's perfectly legal for the insurance policyholder to be different to the registered owner.

There is a registered keeper and an owner (and they can be the same), but as far as the DVLA are concerned, there is no such thing as a "registered owner".

unholyangel

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

Ah, in that case, no problem. It's when he comes to passing his test and being the main driver that he'll really need his own policy.

It's well worth shopping around for the learner insurance. When my son started to learn, I tried to add him onto my Direct Line policy and was quoted a ridiculous figure, I ended up switching to someone else for a year. DL had always been the cheapest by some margin for me (and continue to be so now my son is not included - and yes, I shop around every year), but I've heard that they're one of those companies that simply do not like to insure learners - perhaps that's why they're generally good value for us older drivers ? Anyway, whatever the case, it's well worth shopping around.

Been some years since I was a learner but it was DL I was with. First on my dads policy as a named driver and then on my own.

They may dislike to insure learner drivers now though - this was about 15 years ago.

chrisw

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

However - and this is a very important point - if your son is the main driver, he needs it to be insured in his name.

That isn't right. There's no reason why a named driver can't be the main driver.

The car can still be insured by the mother with the son as a named driver even after passing his test, as long as its made clear that the son is the main user.

The disadvantage of course is that the son won't be building up any No Claim Discount of his own.

Apodemus

We’ve found DL ok for adding learner to the policy, however once they’ve passed the test...Ouch!

Aretnap

chrisw wrote: »

That isn't right. There's no reason why a named driver can't be the main driver.

The car can still be insured by the mother with the son as a named driver even after passing his test, as long as its made clear that the son is the main user.

The disadvantage of course is that the son won't be building up any No Claim Discount of his own.

This is correct, and furthermore there isn't always a need to declare who the main driver is at all. Different insurers ask different questions and there are some who don't ask who the main driver is because they don't care - from memory Admiral are one example.Presumably they just price on the assumption that the riskier driver will usually be driving it - that's simpler all round and means that the problem of fronting does not arise.

Basically read the questions that you are asked. If the insurer asks who is the owner of the car you need to tell them. If they ask who will be the main driver you need to tell them. If they mention these things in the assumptions then you need to check that the assumptions are correct, and tell them if they're not. But if they don't ask the question then you can presume that they are not interested in the answer - you are under no obligation to second-guess what they might want to know or to volunteer information that they don't ask about.

On another point, as mentioned above she can expect insuring him to become significantly more expensive when he actuallky passes his test, and it may be necessary to switch to another insurance company to get him insured at all. This sounds counter-intuitive, but remember that when he's a learner he'll have Mum in the car saying "take it steady, watch out for these pedestrians, slow down". As a newly passed driver he'll have three other teenagers in the car saying "so how fast does this go then?" (Well, maybe he won't personally - but the insurer will be worried that he will).