Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Car insurer doesn't want to pay

97 replies

Member336569 · 10/12/2019 12:27

Son wanted to avoid a traffic jam and ended up in a pickle. He drove the car into an area and although the engine was running, he couldn't get the car out. He might have hit black ice as the outside was -1c. But insurer already said they wouldn't pay out. Having never claimed car insurance before. I would appreciate some advice. I'm the policy holder and he is the main driver.

OP posts:

GeorgieTheGorgeousGoat · 10/12/2019 13:43

It is illegal for anyone other than the main driver to be the policy holder.

@prh47bridge I’m surprised at you on this one, you’re usually so knowledgeable. But indeed you can have a policy holder and main driver in different names. DH and I are the same as poster up thread, main drivers on each other cars. It’s all perfectly clear on our certificates and we’ve even made a claim (Dh had an accident) through my policy.

NeedAnExpert · 10/12/2019 13:45

Insurance and spouses (formal legal relationship) is very different than parent and child (no formal legal relationship).

snowybaubles · 10/12/2019 13:46

Insurance and spouses (formal legal relationship) is very different than parent and child (no formal legal relationship).

This has literally nothing to do with it.

Stupiddriver1 · 10/12/2019 13:47

Did he go off road or into flood water as I don't think they pay out for that?

Stupiddriver1 · 10/12/2019 13:48

When I say off road, I mean a purposeful off road short cut.... Not skidding off the road.

NeedAnExpert · 10/12/2019 13:49

This has literally nothing to do with it.

It does given I was responding to a post about a payout when the main driver and policy holder were married.

You can expect insurers to take a lot more interest when it is parent and child.

(Wind your prickles in, will you?).

snowybaubles · 10/12/2019 13:51

@NeedAnExpert

The fact they were married is irrelevant. It's who is NAMED as the main driver. Being married doesn't give any difference in this situation. You need to be named as the main driver if you are the main driver regardless of whether it's a spouse/child or anyone else.

Elementalillusions · 10/12/2019 13:51

I read it that in trying to avoid the traffic he drove off road (maybe to turn around) without realising the ground was not solid, either flooding or marsh/deep mud and although the engine didn’t conk out the car couldn’t get out of the water/mud and was underivable as a result of damage caused by it being there.

snowybaubles · 10/12/2019 13:54

You can expect insurers to take a lot more interest when it is parent and child.

I can't work out what you mean by this. The insurance company had the same interest regardless of relationships. What matters is who is the policyholder, who is the main driver and any other named drivers.

Wind your prickles in, will you?

Eh?

prh47bridge · 10/12/2019 13:54

Perfectly legal and not uncommon

When you buy car insurance the first person named is the policyholder and main driver unless you specifically tell the insurance company otherwise and they agree to this. The premium is always based on the main driver and they will usually earn any no claims discount.

If the first named driver is not the main driver and you have not informed the insurance company you are committing insurance fraud. Not uncommon, particularly as a way to reduce insurance premiums for younger drivers, but very much illegal.

snowybaubles · 10/12/2019 13:56

So not illegal at all. OP said she is policy holder and he is main driver.

prh47bridge · 10/12/2019 13:59

@Soontobe60 and @GeorgieTheGorgeousGoat - see my clarification above. Yes, it is ok if you are up front with the insurance company about it and they agree. However, in the vast majority of cases where the main driver's parent is the policyholder it is an attempt to reduce premiums by leading the insurance company to believe that the older driver is the main driver.

NeedAnExpert · 10/12/2019 13:59

You need to be named as the main driver if you are the main driver regardless of whether it's a spouse/child or anyone else.

I agree with you. (Worked in insurance for years)

Here are 2 scenarios.

Husband and wife insure 2 cars, 1 in each name. Circumstance change and now they are insuring the cars that the other is main driver on. All declared, no worries. One makes a claim. Due to marriage all assets are considered joint. Insurers effectively pay both when they pay out because legally they both own both cars.

Same scenario but a mother insures her son’s car. Again all declared. Insurer would pay out to the policyholder, not the driver. Say mum refuses to give money to son - legally she doesn’t have to. Son could take mum to court and drag insurers in. Greater risk to insurers, so they often do more checks before settling in that case.

MapMyMum · 10/12/2019 14:01

No wonder OP hasnt come back with all the ridiculous bickering about who is right and wrong

kiki22 · 10/12/2019 14:05

It is illegal for anyone other than the main driver to be the policy holder

Do you work for an insurance company?? I do I really hope you don't since you have no idea what your talking about.

Coffeeandcrumpets · 10/12/2019 14:28

59prh47bridge I think you have summed it up perfectly and I do work in car insurance. Many companies out there, if not all, would not insure a car in the parents name, while naming a child as the main driver.

NeedAnExpert · 10/12/2019 14:29

It’s not illegal to do so though.

AJPTaylor · 10/12/2019 15:30

Did he drive it into water?

Give us a clue.

prh47bridge · 10/12/2019 16:07

It’s not illegal to do so though

Unless the insurer is aware of the fact that the policyholder is not the main driver and has agreed to insure on that basis it is insurance fraud, which is a criminal offence.

NeedAnExpert · 10/12/2019 16:09

But that isn’t what you said!

AlexaAmbidextra · 10/12/2019 17:33

All this wrangling over what’s legal and what isn’t. 😄. I’d just like the OP to come back and explain exactly what happened. 🤷‍♀️

AJPTaylor · 10/12/2019 18:20

Well either there was a problem with the underwriting, he did something so stupid that they are invoking the clause stating he did not take reasonable care or there is no damage to the car but a bill for extracting it from where it ended up........

Stupiddriver1 · 10/12/2019 19:02

I also wish the OP would come back. We need to know why they've said they won't pay out before we can advise.

PineappleDanish · 10/12/2019 19:04

Prize to the OP for the vaguest description of a road traffic incident ever! Hope she was clearer with the insurer....

snowybaubles · 10/12/2019 20:00

I'm going to take a wild guess that the insurers won't pay out because they don't have a fucking clue what happened

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread