Page 2 | Fronting insurance ..aibu to think it's wrong?

beentheredonethatt · 2020-01-27T10:01:22+00:00

The car is in finance in her mums name. Her mum has never drove the car but is named as main driver. The girl is named on insurance but she is the only person who drives the car daily.

theunknownknown · 27/01/2020 10:50

Yes, I think mine at the time was Admiral, the following year he had a black box. And I could monitor his driving

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 11:49

My point is it can happen to even the most careful of drivers

Well it can't really, can it. The most careful of drivers never run up the back of anyone, because they are the most careful of drivers. The clue is in the phrase "most careful".

cuckooken · 27/01/2020 11:56

I would love to know who all these people are who go around telling others the details of their insurance policies.

I am well into my 40's and to this day not a single person I have EVER come into contact with has decided to tell me who the policyholder/main driver/additional drivers are on their car insurance.

OP, how do you know this?

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 12:08

I am well into my 40's and to this day not a single person I have EVER come into contact with has decided to tell me who the policyholder/main driver/additional drivers are on their car insurance.

If you ever get into a conversation with other parents about the cost of insuring teenage kids, plenty of them will happily confess to committing this fraud.

cuckooken · 27/01/2020 12:17

If you ever get into a conversation with other parents about the cost of insuring teenage kids, plenty of them will happily confess to committing this fraud.

Like I said, never happened.

mencken · 27/01/2020 13:19

put the main driver on as the main driver, no problem. Yes, it will cost a bomb if the main driver is a teen but that's because they are a massive insurance risk.

the 'not bothered' brigade are presumably not bothered if they are hit by an uninsured driver. Or if the family breadwinner is killed or disabled by one. Because the 'fronter' has been oh-so-clever in saving money on insurance.

ilovemyrednosedaymug · 27/01/2020 13:49

YANBU OP, this is a very common conversation among parents of 17 year olds, I have heard several friends discussing it recently as all their children reach 17.

Yes it is illegal, but some say that they have no choice as can't afford insurance for 17yo. But at the end of the day, it is them who is breaking the law and them who will have to take the consequences of their actions.

The legal thing to do and the best thing to do as a parent is to try and find the cheapest insurance that you can for the 17yo and at least they start to build up their own no claims etc.

My cousin had to come down for a funeral and he drove back with his daughter, but she refused to let him drive her car because it had a black box and she was afraid he would speed in it

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 13:58

Yes it is illegal, but some say that they have no choice as can't afford insurance for 17yo

They do have a choice, don't get the 17 y/o a car. There's lots of things I want that I can't afford. I go without, I don't break the law to have them.

iklboo · 27/01/2020 13:59

Well it can't really, can it. The most careful of drivers never run up the back of anyone, because they are the most careful of drivers. The clue is in the phrase "most careful".

But other people can run into them.

ChristmasSweet · 27/01/2020 14:02

Why not just do it the other way around? I had myself as the named driver and policyholder, but added on my parents as additional drivers for cheaper rates. Legal and meant they could drive it if one of theirs broke down. Did that for years until it made no difference.

megletthesecond · 27/01/2020 14:10

cuck some people are dim and have big mouths. I know a colleague who chattily announced she covered for her DH and took his speeding points. She had no idea it was illegal

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 14:23

Well it can't really, can it. The most careful of drivers never run up the back of anyone, because they are the most careful of drivers. The clue is in the phrase "most careful"

But other people can run into them.

But that's not what happened. He ran into the back of someone else.

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 14:24

some people are dim and have big mouths

Two features that often go hand in hand.

MereDintofPandiculation · 27/01/2020 14:35

if monday to friday it goes from home to the local college and back again they're going to say the young driver is the main driver So what if Mon-Fri it goes to the local college, say 15 miles in total for the week, and Sat and Sun each week it totals 150miles driven by the parent? In terms of frequency the young person is the main driver, but in terms of mileage, it's the parent, by a long way.

safariboot · 27/01/2020 14:59

It's fraud.

Regarding high claims for minor accidents, been there. Caused a low speed shunt. The damage to my car was a smashed number plate, that's it. I had and sent dashcam footage was sent. Other party made a £9900 claim for whiplash for four people (we suspect their car only had two occupants!) and my insurer paid out. They outright admitted it wasn't worth the legal costs for them to try and defend the claim.

Baaaahhhhh · 27/01/2020 15:04

If nothing else will change their minds, just imagine if the girl knocks down and seriously injures a pedestrian. Her insurance may be invalidated, and the consequences for her and the pedestrian are horrendous.

BlouseAndSkirt · 27/01/2020 15:09

I know a colleague who chattily announced she covered for her DH and took his speeding points. She had no idea it was illegal

How do people like this exist? Get paid work?
Apart from it being obviously illegal, and the liability all being explained in the paperwork, how did she miss the long running story in the press about a member of the government and his wife going to prison for 8 moths over this?

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 15:47

If nothing else will change their minds, just imagine if the girl knocks down and seriously injures a pedestrian. Her insurance may be invalidated, and the consequences for her and the pedestrian are horrendous.

It won't effect the pedestrian, as the insurance company have to meet any third party claim, even if the cover was arranged fraudulently. But what they can do (and will do) is sue the policyholder (the parent) to recover the amount they paid the pedestrian. So bye bye house, basically.

cuckooken · 27/01/2020 15:55

If nothing else will change their minds, just imagine if the girl knocks down and seriously injures a pedestrian. Her insurance may be invalidated, and the consequences for her and the pedestrian are horrendous.

That isn't how it works. The third party cover would still be valid.

ColaFreezePop · 27/01/2020 15:55

@Baaaahhhhh The insurer always has to pay out to the third party. This is why you are not allowed two insurance policies running at the same time in your name on the same vehicle. As first it would be a battle between the insurers to see who isn't liable to pay the claim, then they would chase the policy holder who defrauded them for the sum they had to payout.

EwanHuzarmi · 27/01/2020 16:47

The insurer always has to pay out to the third party. This is why you are not allowed two insurance policies running at the same time in your name on the same vehicle. As first it would be a battle between the insurers to see who isn't liable to pay the claim, then they would chase the policy holder who defrauded them for the sum they had to payout.

You are right in that they have to pay the third party, but it is quite legal to have 2 policies for the same car in the same name, so long as you only intend to claim off one for each event.

It's quite common in some cases, like fast food delivery. You have your normal policy, excluding business use, and the fast food joint does you another policy that only covers you while delivering food, excluding pleasure use. So depending what you're doing when you have your claim will determine which insurer pays.

MAFIL · 27/01/2020 17:01

It is illegal and very short sighted.
As has already been stated it will all come to light if the young driver has an accident - quite possibly even if it not their fault, and that can happen to anyone.
Plus of course they are not develooing any no claims bonus of their own, so unless the family plan on keeping this deception up for a long time, they are going to have yo bite the bullet at some point.
Putting the adults on as named drivers will bring the cost down anyway, without being illegal, immoral or risky.

1Morewineplease · 27/01/2020 22:59

Why doesn’t the girl
Get her own insurance.
What she’s doing is fraudulent.
If it gets discovered, there probably won’t be an insurance company that will insure either of them.

TheHonestTruth100 · 27/01/2020 23:05

Of course it's wrong.

It's also illegal.

What is even the point of having insurance if you're gonna do that. Get into one accident and you're fucked.

BackforGood · 27/01/2020 23:16

If you ever get into a conversation with other parents about the cost of insuring teenage kids, plenty of them will happily confess to committing this fraud.

Not people I know - presumably they understand what has been clearly explained earlier on on this thread - that it invalidates not only your current insurance policy, but also means you won't be able to get insurance in the future. That is before you get on to being sued by someone who might have been hurt in an accident caused by the young person.

Yes, costs are horrendous (am currently on my 3rd dc learning to drive), but they choose to work and save or they choose to wait to drive until they are both older, and are earning enough to pay the insurance premium.