to put my mother as a named driver to lower my insurance?

[PyongyangKipperbang]

She is now legally allowed to drive but doesnt as she wasnt allowed to (and didnt) due to a dx of epilepsy two years ago. Epilepsy is now controlled, no seizures in well over a year but she doesnt want to drive anymore and sold her car. She is 75.

She wasnt legally required to surrender her license so she didnt as it was her ID. I am naming her on my insurance as it lowers my premium, no idea why as she is well into her 70's and would be a bad liability! A colleague said that I shouldnt do it and that it is "dodgy" and could lead to my insurance being invalid.

Why? Is it not ok? She will never drive it, has no access to the keys even if she wanted to (she doesnt) so what is the problem. Am I missing something important?

Ordinarily, as a named 2nd driver, it's fine.

(a lot of young / inexperienced drivers often put their parents as the "Main" driver and themselves as 2nd "named" driver to get even lower premiums - That's known as "Fronting" and is illegal).

But...

With her Epilepsy - has she notified DVLA about that? - It's one of the medical conditions that people are legally required to declare.

(I know you said she doesn't drive now, so it's mostly irrelevant, but if you ever needed to make a claim and the insurance company decide to run some checks on both of your licences... Not necessarily relevant to your claim, but to see if they can find any excuses not to pay out for a claim... If her epilepsy hasn't been declared to DVLA, that would technically make her licence invalid, which may or may not then call into question the validity of your insurance policy... and "Hey Presto" - Gives the insurance company the ammo they're looking for to either deny the claim or come after you to pay them back)

Likewise on the insurance application form - I think there's a box on there to the effect of "Do you, or any named driver, have any medical conditions"

I'm being a bit overcautious there, but when you're dealing with insurance companies - you need to make sure everything is in order in case they do go over it with a fine tooth comb.

• If you add someone only to get a cheaper rate, but they never actually drive the car, and you misrepresent their role (e.g., saying they’re a regular driver or the main driver when they’re not), insurers may treat that as insurance fraud (fronting).
• If discovered, consequences can include:
• Policy cancellation (you lose coverage).
• Claim denial (they refuse to pay out if you have an accident).
• Higher premiums in the future (you’ll be flagged as higher risk).
• Potential legal consequences in serious fraud cases.

Your question is essentially, ‘Is fraud bad?’ Yes, it’s bad. Grow up.

Her age may mean that it doesn’t lower your premium as expected. Costs can rise as drivers age as risk increases.

Have you declared the epilepsy to the insurance company?

Generally adding an extra named driver is fine even if they are unlikely to drive, just doing it 'in case' is fine. However in your case she absolutely won't drive so it is dishonest and could cause problems. In any event once you declare the epilepsy it will be more expensive. If you don't declare the epilepsy then you will have a whiles heap of trouble.

if you intended to put her as the main driver that is breaking law and would make your insurance invalid. if you add her as a second driver and she has a valid licence that is absolutely fine and acceptable

I'm on my DS's insurance and it did bring his premium down. He's also on my car insurance because we swap cars when we need to. The question is, how often would your DM be driving your car? If not at all, then it's not worth the risk.

Fraud

So long as she's legally allowed to drive and iher medical and mental state wouldn't prevent her (including informing DVLA as pp say) then it is not fraud or misrepresentation to have her as a named (but not primary) driver. My DH is a named driver of my car but last touched a steering wheel 16 years ago. In the event that circumstances arise that he might need to drive he legally could, and that's a valid reason to name him even if those circumstances never arise. It would be fraud and misrepresentation if she was declared as the main driver but that isn't what you are doing. Your colleague is wrong.

I am the second driver on our car insurance. We both drive the car; DH more than me.

When it was time to renew, the insurance company we’d been with for a year or too, increased the premium massively for no reason. I asked what might reduce it and was told adding another driver would. The only person I could have added was our son, who lives some distance away and would not have a reason to drive the car. Is that getting cheaper insurance fraudulently then, because it was suggested by the insurer?

As it transpired, it was reduced by £1, so a pointless exercise anyway.

I don’t think it is fraud unless you are planning to not disclose that she has epilepsy? There will be a medical conditions section which you can’t lie on or that will be fraud and could invalidate your insurance. Also surprised that adding a 75 year old with epilepsy lowers your premium?!

She is legally allowed to drive though so nobody can prove she has no intention of driving your car, adding her as “just in case I want to share driving when we take longer journeys together” is perfectly fine reasoning even if you have no intention of doing that.

If she’s 75 and has epilepsy, I’d doubt it would reduce the cost. I’d expect it to increase, plus I know from experience, many insurance companies get you to jump through hoops with doctors notes, access to medical records etc. to consider insuring you.
It’s not illegal to have her as a second driver (as long as you’ve declared medical history) but as many have said, it’s illegal if she were be listed as the main driver and wasn’t.

My DH is now 72 with no additional health issues and adding him to my son's insurance now increases rather than reducing the premium. No fronting here - they drive one anothers vehicle fairly regularly depending who needs to use the larger estate car.

Just call and ask the insurance company. If they say it is fine then it is!

The only fraud I see committed is by the insurance companies that hike prices up every year even if you’ve not done anything wrong and all this while your car is worth less than the year before.

The thing I’d be worried about is her epilepsy but I’d have no moral worries at all because they don’t care about how we can afford to pay for our insurance.

These responses remind me of the answers you see on ‘Tesco accidentally refunded me £17’ and posters are insisting OP walks across hot coals to return it.

I was thinking exactly the same!

I used to be on my dad's car and vice versa when I lived at home as sometimes they needed to be moved to get yours out so we'd both just take whichever one was easiest (for quick trips not to work etc), I am still on his insurance after an incident where he drove himself to hospital and was then admitted (why he didn't wake my mum is another matter) no one was insured to drive it and I have an automatic licence and his car is automatic so he has at times loaned it to me when mine's in the garage etc and gone to collect mine for me when I'm at work. He used to make my insurance cheaper, he now makes mine more expensive and I make his cheaper. I'm now 40 and he's 72. I'd be surprised with those medical conditions and her age that it actually makes it cheaper also technically as you've no intention of her driving it, it's dishonest

Why?

All everybody is advising is that she play it by the rules, as tempting as it is to "stick it to the big companies - they can afford it!".

Your comment might hold water if it was just a single agency (Tesco) for £17, but it's not.

One wrong move here and you potentially have multiple agencies on your back which can have much more serious implications in future.

Don't declare Epilepsy to DVLA - Mother's licence technically becomes invalid...

Mother's licence invalid means 2nd Named Driver is not legally permitted to drive, contrary to what was declared on the insurance application form, resulting in insurance policy potentially being deemed invalid as OP has lied to her insurance company...

OP then drives without realising the insurance has been cancelled - risks getting prosecuted for driving with no insurance - 6 points, a hefty fine & the car impounded.

Meanwhile, the insurance company logs the OP's "mistruths" on the central Insurance Fraud Database which all UK insurers have access to...

OP Struggles then to get any form of insurance (Car, Home, Life, etc.) in future, or at massively inflated prices, due to the black marks on the Insurance Fraud database.

Just so she could save £20 per year on her car insurance...

Just do it. It’s perfectly normal. No biggy if she doesn’t drive it!

If she’s a named second driver (definitely NOT the main driver) it’s fine.

It’s cheaper because insurers (for whatever reason) consider it as spreading the risk.

You can add her as a named driver, of course that's not fraud.

however, you must inform the insurance company of her epilepsy. Failure to do this invalidates the policy. She absolutely MUST inform DVLA

(insurance underwriter here)

As long as the DVLA is aware of her epilepsy and is updated if there are any changes throughout the length of the policy, and you are adhering to any other conditions it’s fine.

I am a named driver for both of my parents. I’ve never driven either of their cars but they like the idea in case something happens to them and I need to drive their cars because for some reason they can’t.

DH is tall and dislikes driving the kind of car I have. I think he has driven my current car once, which was to tell me he didn’t like the car and wouldn’t be driving it unless their was an emergency again, but he’s insured as a named driver and always will be. I am a named driver on his car and probably drive it almost as often as he does.