Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Crazyjester900
Active Member
18 still my current car 
Yes it is, it's called 'fronting'
If you are the main driver, you should be the person insured as such
andy_k
MB Enthusiast
then loads of your friends are also acting fraudulently and very possibly driving around uninsured!!!!
As long as your name is on the policy and you are insured on another car, you can drive it when you want??? Thats interesting... we did that on our mark 1 GTi... and the insurance guy himself even suggested it to bring the price down fo rme and my dad... lol
pammy
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2003
- Messages
- 7,468
- Location
- North Yorkshire
- Car
- hers - slk 320, his - dull diesel BMW fleet :/, Xtrail, Honda CBR 1100xx, Yamaha YZF600, Ribble Road
don't understand this post at all - but your inference is that it's OK to insure cars in the parent's name with the youngster being the named driver - and that they are then the main driver - not the policy holder. This is fraud, the policy holder should be the main driver.
robert.saunders
MB Enthusiast
I'd listen to the questions next time
Who is the policy holder and who is the main driver.I understand the desire to cut costs for early motoring, but when the insurance doesn't bail you out in a claim as they invoke a clause (which they really will try to do) where they feel deception was used, it really is a false economy
mercboiuk
MB Enthusiast
Hmmmm, it appears that there are alot more under 25s on here than I thought!
Darren
Darren
what is there not to understand??? I just said that if you are insured on another car and your name is on your father's policy as a second driver you can therefore drive any of these cars when ever you want?
I did not say at ANY POINT in ANY of my posts that i decieve the insurer by saying for example, the father would be the main driver when he isn't, of course he is, but as a second driver you can also drive the damn car.
Let me make it clearer - as an example, one of my friends drives a 325Ci and his father has the E60 M5, he is insured as a second driver on the M5 and if we're going out somewhere in london or so, he'll be a show off and bring it out, but its not his car and we all know it. So thats what i mean when i say that your name should be on the V5 and you should be the polciy holder for a car to be counted as yours.
Whats the big deal?
I did not say at ANY POINT in ANY of my posts that i decieve the insurer by saying for example, the father would be the main driver when he isn't, of course he is, but as a second driver you can also drive the damn car.
Let me make it clearer - as an example, one of my friends drives a 325Ci and his father has the E60 M5, he is insured as a second driver on the M5 and if we're going out somewhere in london or so, he'll be a show off and bring it out, but its not his car and we all know it. So thats what i mean when i say that your name should be on the V5 and you should be the polciy holder for a car to be counted as yours.
Whats the big deal?
Last edited:
I mean we always make fun of him when he does it because we know it isn't his car and cuz he's quite young, the 'fastest' car he can get insured on directly at the moment is the 325, but i'm sure after a few years he'll take the M5 off his dad... they're absolutely loaded.
When i passed my test, my dad insured me as a second driver on the golf so i can use it in the weekends when i'm not at college and he's not at work, cuz i still couldn't afford my own car yet. i really dont see whats wrong with this!
When i passed my test, my dad insured me as a second driver on the golf so i can use it in the weekends when i'm not at college and he's not at work, cuz i still couldn't afford my own car yet. i really dont see whats wrong with this!
pammy
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2003
- Messages
- 7,468
- Location
- North Yorkshire
- Car
- hers - slk 320, his - dull diesel BMW fleet :/, Xtrail, Honda CBR 1100xx, Yamaha YZF600, Ribble Road
First - please calm down - there is no need to shout or be aggressive.
What you actually are saying is that if you are a policy holder on a car that you own etc and are a named driver on another vehicle owned by someone else then that's OK. And yes it is as long as you are not the main driver of the vehicle you are a named driver for. Sorry - but that was not clear from your previous posts.
No you didn;t say you decieved the insures but it was inferred
chrispy
Active Member
My nipper is getting an A Class for christmas this year (not a new one obviously) and he'll be 18.
st4
Banned
I'd listen to the questions next time
I understand the desire to cut costs for early motoring, but when the insurance doesn't bail you out in a claim as they invoke a clause (which they really will try to do) where they feel deception was used, it really is a false economy
Define the main driver, say for example I have a car, and my old man insurers it as the main driver, and me as an additional. I drive it and so does he, who is the main driver. Him or me?
Aside how is this main driver defined is it counted as who does more miles in the car or who has the longest duration driving it (I might use it to go to work doing 100 miles/week taking 10hrs whereas old man might use it in the weekend and go 140 miles in 2hrs),
How can any of this be proved in the event of the claim. When I insured my car (in my name) it asked me if I were the registered keeper, if I wasn't it wouldn't insure.
So is the Main driver the V5C holder or the person who uses it the most timewise or milewise. Note the V5 doesn't evidence ownership, its not a document of title
robert.saunders
MB Enthusiast
No idea; ask your insurance company
Ade B
MB Enthusiast
Whilst many people play on this (myself included at 17 many years ago), would you want to argue the toss with the insurance company come claim time?
I had a 1978 2.8 Granada as my first runabout, insurance did payout when I carefully backed into a parked car outside our drive once on a wet November night (we then fixed the reversing lights and rear heated screen
) but that was back in 1988.Ade
SilverSaloon
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
- Messages
- 7,758
- Car
- 1994 W124 E300D Estate, 1985 R107 280SL
I agree that if you are the main user of the car then you should be the policy holder.
HOWEVER - i'm a named driver on my wife's policy (and she is named driver on my policy). We both use each others cars if and when and how much we want.
cant really see it being a problem at all in an event of a claim.... and unless we have 4 seperate policies then how else to do it?
In reality, we both use our cars ourselves more than the named drivers, but i am not convinced how it could ever be proven really if she did drive my car more than i do.
If i have a crash in her car on my way to work, because i happen to take that car that day, i expect to be fully covered, and i wouldnt expect any problems during claim time. I just cant see the difference between that and Rage's situation. Other than its father/son scenario instead of spouse, which may cause the insurer to look into things a little more?
EDIT - i believe there is a difference between POLICY HOLDER and NAMED DRIVERS and POLICY HOLDER and a set MAIN DRIVER + NAMED DRIVERS.....
HOWEVER - i'm a named driver on my wife's policy (and she is named driver on my policy). We both use each others cars if and when and how much we want.
cant really see it being a problem at all in an event of a claim.... and unless we have 4 seperate policies then how else to do it?
In reality, we both use our cars ourselves more than the named drivers, but i am not convinced how it could ever be proven really if she did drive my car more than i do.
If i have a crash in her car on my way to work, because i happen to take that car that day, i expect to be fully covered, and i wouldnt expect any problems during claim time. I just cant see the difference between that and Rage's situation. Other than its father/son scenario instead of spouse, which may cause the insurer to look into things a little more?
EDIT - i believe there is a difference between POLICY HOLDER and NAMED DRIVERS and POLICY HOLDER and a set MAIN DRIVER + NAMED DRIVERS.....
Last edited:
As insurance is risk-based, they would look to see who defined the main risk on the policy.
As you say, this may be difficult to determine. Safest bet is that the person named as the registered keeper is the main driver. However, if the insurance decide to investigate a claim they will look at a wide variety of things.
For example (based on a real case known to me) - mother buys small car, is registered keeper and is insured as main driver with teenage son as named driver. Son crashes car. On investigation the insurer saw that the car had cosmetic modifications (as they termed it - various decals, etc) that would intimate that the mother was not the main driver. This was challenged by the family when the insurers refused to pay out - when the mother was asked what the decals represented (brands, etc) she was unable to answer and so the insurance company won on the basis that she was not the main driver as named on the policy.
There is a reason why main driver is not more clearly defined - it allows a wider area of uncertainty for the insurer to wriggle in
st4
Banned
I don't fancy argueing the toss with my insurers. As I am the sole driver of my car (old man on as an additional as it makes it cheaper) i didn't deploy the named driver dodge.
However defining this main driver malarky is proving harder than I thought. eg if my old man crashed my car, would the insurers think I was fronting him. How could I prove he wasn't the additional driver?
There is, usually the policy holder must be the main driver.
However defining this main driver malarky is proving harder than I thought. eg if my old man crashed my car, would the insurers think I was fronting him. How could I prove he wasn't the additional driver?
There is, usually the policy holder must be the main driver.
BIG Sean
Active Member
Ditto - we own our own cars and I insure both cars with her as named driver on both
