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?

My mum was a named driver on my policy, although she rarely drove my car. She is now 78 and still drives her own car so I took her off mine. Not having her as a named driver reduced my premium by £152.

If she was diagnosed two years ago and it is well-controlled with medication, she could easily be allowed to drive again by now. It’s usually 12 months without a seizure.

That was my experience too once my Dad got to about 73 he started costing me money.
But for a good 10 years before that he made no difference but was on there 'just in case'. I always thought it was a good idea to have a second driver just in case something happened to me.

There's certainly nothing wrong with having a second named driver - just in case - but I'd be surprised if the Ops mum reduced her premium at the age she is.

Why would it need to be defended in court?
How would it get to court?
I'll ask again for you to link the law and not your opinion which numerous people have pointed out is wrong

My spinster Great Auntie had my Grandad and Uncle as named drivers on her policy for around 40 years, incase she was ever taken ill. One year, in their 80s, she got taken ill on holiday in Devon, and my Grandad drove my Uncle down to get them, and their car, back home to the North West. The purpose for which they'd had named drivers on their policy FINALLY happened. Are you saying my very law-abiding twinset and pearls great aunties committed fraud because they DIDN'T get ill on holiday for 39 of those 40+ years?

You've backtracked from it's illegal/fraud, to morally incorrect to "it's my view". Luckily insurance claims aren't settled on your view, it usually goes off the T&Cs, but hey, I'm sure you'll still tell I'm wrong.

@FarmGirl78 exactly it makes perfect sense to have someone else as a named driver 'just incase'.
Before getting married and having kids I used to do a lot of sports, running, horse riding and pilates.
My fear was always that I'd get injured and be unable to drive.
Even after i married DH travels a lot with work so again it made sense to keep my Dad as my emergency backup plan.

The insurance companies also weight up how much the other named drivers are likely to drive the car by asking if they have access to another vehicle.

OP states

‘she is now legally allowed to drive’

and

‘She wasn’t legally required to surrender her license’

i know from personal experience, and the DVLA website confirms this, that you MUST surrender you licence if you have epilepsy. If you don’t, you could be fined £1,000, even if you don’t drive.

if you want to drive again, you then have to re-apply for your licence and the DVLA will do their investigations on a persons health and they then may be allowed to have their licence back.

so although OP’s mother didn’t drive for 2 years, and has had no epileptic episodes for over a year, that doesn’t mean she can just get back in a car and drive again. Her licence wouldn’t be valid as the DVLA have not approved her to drive.

if this affects you, please double check by phoning the DVLA - they are very helpful.

From the DVLA website:

Epilepsy and driving
You must tell DVLA if you've had any epileptic seizures or blackouts.

You must stop driving straight away.

You can be fined up to £1,000 if you do not tell DVLA about a medical condition that affects your driving.

You may be prosecuted if you're involved in an accident as a result.

DVLAwill let you know whether or not you qualify after you’ve filled in the form. Until you hear from them you must stop driving.

Don’t be silly

I am not going in to the ins and outs of my mothers health issues, but yes it was all done legally and above board. In fact I believe DVLA were notified by her consultant, although not 100% on that.

In the end, I was chatting to my sister about it she said the claim she made when her car was rear ended was now over 5 years ago, so she could go on if it would be cheaper for me. Checked and it was, so my mother is not named on there, Dsis is instead. When I was speaking to the woman at the insurance co she said that she would always recommend adding a second driver as it almost always brings the price down for single people you just have to choose carefully who to have (what job they do, marital status, home ownership etc all weights one way or another).

So there you have it, all sorted, all legal, all good.

Sorry to disappoint those baying for my "fraudulent" blood.