car insurance for 17 year old. help!

poet123

I think most insurers will expect main driver to be the registered keeper too or will at least ask why he is not. I think that perhaps before committing to a price it would have been wise to do some research and factor the insurance costs into the deal. This what we did,we found endersleigh to be good for young drivers as they are specialist student insurers.

How could we provide evidence? no one monitors our usage,no one but family members travel in the cars,they are not parked on secure swipe in car parks. There would be no way I could prove which of us drove which car on any given day except from memory.

raskazz

poet123 wrote: »

I think most insurers will expect main driver to be the registered keeper too or will at least ask why he is not. I think that perhaps before committing to a price it would have been wise to do some research and factor the insurance costs into the deal. This what we did,we found endersleigh to be good for young drivers as they are specialist student insurers.

Yes, this is quite correct.

If the parent is stated as the main user of the car and the vehicle is registered in the name of a child who is a named driver, then this is an obvious indicator of fronting.

raskazz

poet123 wrote: »

How could we provide evidence? no one monitors our usage,no one but family members travel in the cars,they are not parked on secure swipe in car parks. There would be no way I could prove which of us drove which car on any given day except from memory.

Remember, you don't have to prove who was driving on one particular day. The main user is what is crucial - i.e. who uses it the most over a period of time.

Receipts for petrol, maintenance are a potential indicator. Accident investigators have been known to wait outside places of work and houses, ask neighbours to investigate the true usage of the insured vehicle.

poet123

The petrol costs for all 3 cars and maintenance come from our joint account as do the tax and insurance even though the cars are owned by 3 family members. I cannot believe that the fact that we pay these bills could be construed that our son who is a student and who we maintain financially in other areas could not be the main driver of his own car. Also we live in an area set well back fom the road up a long drive where our neighbours would certainly have no idea which one of us drove which car most.

Bennifred

chuckles1066 wrote: »

............My niece (at age 17) was a named driver on her dad's policy but also bought a shell of a vehicle for £40 which she never drove and didn't have any intention of ever driving. She simply left it in their garage and insured it in her name for third-party cover only.........after five years, she'd paid £470 in insurance premiums but had accumulated 65% no-claims bonus :j

What a brilliant idea! Does a car need to be roadworthy/ have an MOT to be insured? Hmmm - wonder where we can stash a wreck.......:p
I've just spent several hours looking at quotes with my 17yr old DS2 (test passed and Pass Plus taken four months ago) as a named driver on his Dad's insurance and Elephant.co.uk have given the lowest quote so far - next lowest was £160 more. Current insurer's renewal quote has increased sunstantially, presumably because now he's free to go out unsupervised?

Oh - sorry OP, that was off topic!:o

darich

chuckles1066 wrote: »

So if I had a 17yr old who'd pranged my car and I was "fronting", if he says "this was the second time I'd driven the car" and I say "it was the second time he'd driven the car", how do they detect it?

Only the very stupid get tripped up..........which isn't to say fronting's right, of course, because it isn't.

But I can understand why a 17yr old faced with a £3k premium might be tempted to ask mummy or daddy to insure the car in their name.

What you're forgetting is that mummy and daddy often have their own car. More often these days it's their own car EACH.

With that being the case, why would daddy be the main driver of a 6yo fiesta (as an example) if he has his own Focus/astra/mondeo/whatever aswell?
where was the car crashed? on the road to uni? Would that be the road to uni that son/daughter attends every day?
what time? 8:30am? just when junior is heading to uni?
Junior is the main driver but he's a struggling student living with his/her parents and no job?

But dad was the main driver.

Yes I'm sure he was. Except his office is on the other side of town - sometimes even with a company car.

I'm sure if you both say it often enough maybe the insurance company will be convinced.

Maybe.

silvercar

He is going to be driving to school every day, he is going to be the main driver!

OK Directline have come up trumps. Discount for buying online and discount for us having house insurance and another car insured with them. That is with the car in his name and him being the main driver. I have put others on as named drivers in case we do use his car occasionally. Quote now under £2k.

Will still try some others.

Thanks for advice.

raskazz

poet123 wrote: »

The petrol costs for all 3 cars and maintenance come from our joint account as do the tax and insurance even though the cars are owned by 3 family members. I cannot believe that the fact that we pay these bills could be construed that our son who is a student and who we maintain financially in other areas could not be the main driver of his own car. Also we live in an area set well back fom the road up a long drive where our neighbours would certainly have no idea which one of us drove which car most.

You need not worry then, if your son is the main driver of the car he uses and is named as such on the policy.

If you are not fronting then you have nothing to fear.

darich

Bennifred wrote: »

What a brilliant idea! Does a car need to be roadworthy/ have an MOT to be insured? Hmmm - wonder where we can stash a wreck.......:p
I've just spent several hours looking at quotes with my 17yr old DS2 (test passed and Pass Plus taken four months ago) as a named driver on his Dad's insurance and Elephant.co.uk have given the lowest quote so far - next lowest was £160 more. Current insurer's renewal quote has increased sunstantially, presumably because now he's free to go out unsupervised?

Oh - sorry OP, that was off topic!:o

Everything is electronic these days so it would be really easy for any company to check that the insured car is MOTd and taxed. If it's not it may be passed to the police. They would be legally bound to check the details out and would probably come calling.

Technically speaking i'd have thought it was a type of fraud. You'd in effect be claiming for several years of driving experience when in actual fact you had none.

Badger_Lady

darich wrote: »

Everything is electronic these days so it would be really easy for any company to check that the insured car is MOTd and taxed. If it's not it may be passed to the police. They would be legally bound to check the details out and would probably come calling.

Technically speaking i'd have thought it was a type of fraud. You'd in effect be claiming for several years of driving experience when in actual fact you had none.

I'm not convinced by this - you don't legally have to be MOT'd and taxed to be off the road. And many people still insure their cars while they're off-road (in case of vandalism / accidental damage).

It's an interesting case, but would the insurers really give a poo-poo as long as you don't try to claim? After all, it's difficult to shout "fraud!" if the accused has actually been giving the victim money.