full license and my insurance goes up???

fred252

i'm a named driver on my girlfriend's insurance.

i had been a named driver on a provisional but i recently passed the test. she just called the insrurer to update them on this expecting an insurance reduction. however the premium has now increased? this makes no sense to me whatsoever. how can someone on a provisional be considered less risky than someone who has at least displayed an ability to drive well enough to pass the test?

CiniO

fred252 wrote: »

i'm a named driver on my girlfriend's insurance.

i had been a named driver on a provisional but i recently passed the test. she just called the insrurer to update them on this expecting an insurance reduction. however the premium has now increased? this makes no sense to me whatsoever. how can someone on a provisional be considered less risky than someone who has at least displayed an ability to drive well enough to pass the test?

Because now you can drive her car unaccompanied. That makes it more risky.

PaddyFagan

Two options 1) some insurers (I've found 123.ie bad for this) charge for any change irrespective of the impact on the risk. 2) Because it's based on average acident rates it might be the case that if you where (say) a 30+ year old male on a learners permit than the average acident rate for a 30+ year old male on a full license would be higher (because there are relatively few 30+ learners and the boy racer instincts are fading by that stage, yet the full license 30+ group contains a lot of people who learned 10 years ago and have lots of bad habits).

(Edit) CiniO makes a very good point - didn't think of that!

Paddy

fred252

CiniO wrote: »

Because now you can drive her car unaccompanied. That makes it more risky.

its actually my car.

i find it hard to believe that its statistically more risky but i guess its possible. maybe the stats have changed since the gardai have supposedly started enforcing the rules on provisionals driving unaccompanied...

godtabh

It cheaper to insure my and my girl friend on my car than it is to insure me on my own as I am not using the car 100% of the time.

Jack_Elle

fred252 wrote: »

its actually my car.

i find it hard to believe that its statistically more risky but i guess its possible. maybe the stats have changed since the gardai have supposedly started enforcing the rules on provisionals driving unaccompanied...

Thats correct. Statistically insurers feel theres more risk when the driver is unaccompanied to when they are learners they will always be more cautious etc.. The feeling is once you have your full licence you become a greater risk because you become sometimes over confident in your driving which will cause an accident. Its actually the norm in the UK for insurers to nearly double people's premiums if they are changing their licence from Provisional to Full because in the UK the Police do actually properly enforce the rule that provisional drivers cannot drive alone.

m.j.w

yea thats right about the uk, im insured in the north and passed my test last year. my insurance on the provisonal was £650 with Quinn but when I passed the test I rang them think happy days it will go down now and I was quoted 950. Thats the cheapest I could get anywhere, was going mad but looked it up and thats the norm

Vertakill

Jack_Elle wrote: »

Thats correct. Statistically insurers feel theres more risk when the driver is unaccompanied to when they are learners they will always be more cautious etc.. The feeling is once you have your full licence you become a greater risk because you become sometimes over confident in your driving which will cause an accident.

What a load of mooncack.

That completely defies the logic behind risk assessment.

"Ohh... this gentleman is now more qualified to drive as a result of proving his competency in a driving test... I think I'll increase his insurance!".

The reasoning behind it is most likely down to the fact that the female on the policy will now no longer be driving the car.... leaving you more time to drive it.

Only one person can drive at a time so it would be logical to assume that the male driver would be driving less often if the female was insured on it as she would be driving some of the time... therefore there's less risk involved because females are such fabulous drivers.

TestTransmission

godtabh wrote: »

It cheaper to insure my and my girl friend on my car than it is to insure me on my own as I am not using the car 100% of the time.

Ditto, the missus takes nearly €300 off my policy.She doesn't get to drive it though :pac:

Big Nasty

So they're now charging you more for being a qualifed than when you were on a provisional (and more than likely without a qualified driver beside you most of the time) - fcukin' ridiculous.

The partner / wife named driver thing is true though - helps keep mine a little lower!

Vertakill

Also OP, you're talking about 2 completely different scenarios here. You're not comparing like for like at all.

You were named driver on her policy with a prov license, you said.
And you're comparing a brand new quote with you as the primary driver (you haven't mentioned her so I'm assuming you didn't add her to the policy?) with no real NCB (Bearing in mind, you had some form of NCB with your GF on the prev policy I'm guessing).

The female is nearly always less risky than the male as they are such fabulous drivers, so if you've gotten a quote for yourself on your new license without her in it, it will obviously be more expensive than the previous policy you's were using where she was the primary driver, regardless of what license you have.

Just get her to get a quote on the car and add you as named driver on it again and it'll be lower now that you're on a full license.

Del2005

fred252 wrote: »

i'm a named driver on my girlfriend's insurance.

i had been a named driver on a provisional but i recently passed the test. she just called the insrurer to update them on this expecting an insurance reduction. however the premium has now increased? this makes no sense to me whatsoever. how can someone on a provisional be considered less risky than someone who has at least displayed an ability to drive well enough to pass the test?

The worst part of this is that the insurance company took your money. Your girl friend can't insure your car as she has no interest in it, we've no common law partners, and you can't insure something you don't own.

Break all ties

This is the one thing I hated about robbing Irish insurance companies. They want to know bleeding everything about you and your car, what you had for breakfast etc.

Now in Bulgaria to get insurance I walk into an insurance office and get insurance. They ask for the reg number then they tell you the price. You pay and then you are insured. They don't want to know how many years you have driven on who's policy etc. They don't care what name is on the log book.

Such a breath of fresh air compared to Ireland.

Big Nasty

Break all ties wrote: »

This is the one thing I hated about robbing Irish insurance companies. They want to know bleeding everything about you and your car, what you had for breakfast etc.

Now in Bulgaria to get insurance I walk into an insurance office and get insurance. They ask for the reg number then they tell you the price. You pay and then you are insured. They don't want to know how many years you have driven on who's policy etc. They don't care what name is on the log book.

Such a breath of fresh air compared to Ireland.

Eh, Bulgaria is that corrupt they make the mob look small fry! :eek:

tommyboy2222

Just get her to get a quote on the car and add you as named driver on it again and it'll be lower now that you're on a full license.

Should be 30% lower.

You might also get another approx 20% off if she tells them you are her partner.

Unless you're with a certain insurance company that used to undercut all the other insurance companies but has now been forced to charge proper prices.

fred252

Vertakill wrote: »

Also OP, you're talking about 2 completely different scenarios here. You're not comparing like for like at all.

You were named driver on her policy with a prov license, you said.
And you're comparing a brand new quote with you as the primary driver (you haven't mentioned her so I'm assuming you didn't add her to the policy?) with no real NCB (Bearing in mind, you had some form of NCB with your GF on the prev policy I'm guessing).

The female is nearly always less risky than the male as they are such fabulous drivers, so if you've gotten a quote for yourself on your new license without her in it, it will obviously be more expensive than the previous policy you's were using where she was the primary driver, regardless of what license you have.

Just get her to get a quote on the car and add you as named driver on it again and it'll be lower now that you're on a full license.

maybe i didn't make it clear. i'm not talking about a brand new quote with me as the primary driver. its an increase to our current policy. she's still the primary driver. so i am comparing like for like.

fred252

Del2005 wrote: »

The worst part of this is that the insurance company took your money. Your girl friend can't insure your car as she has no interest in it, we've no common law partners, and you can't insure something you don't own.

does that mean we wouldn't be covered because I'm the actual owner?

Our man in Havana

Is she the name on the log book?

fred252

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Is she the name on the log book?

nope

Our man in Havana

Things would get rather interesting so.

stephendevlin

Your girlfriend does not have any financial interest in that vehicle. Her insurance policy is worthless if you wreck the car. You wont get a penny for it.

I dont know if they would even pay out on anything on that basis.

Our man in Havana

3rd party would still be covered regardless.

The name on the logbook means diddly squat as regards to legal ownership.

stephendevlin

Our man in Havana wrote: »

The name on the logbook means diddly squat as regards to legal ownership.

Can you give an example of this. Far as I can see if my name is on the registration .. its my car?

coolabula

only the registered owner of the car can insure it.
you can't insure something you don't own, the insurance company should have asked who the owner was when giving you the original policy.

it's only something to worry about if you need to claim, as they will look for any reason not to pay out.

pippip

stephendevlin wrote: »

Can you give an example of this. Far as I can see if my name is on the registration .. its my car?

If I purchase a car and have a receipt but register under someone else's name. In court I legally own the car as it was my money that paid for it.

fred252

stephendevlin wrote: »

Your girlfriend does not have any financial interest in that vehicle. Her insurance policy is worthless if you wreck the car. You wont get a penny for it.

I dont know if they would even pay out on anything on that basis.

do you reckon the insurance would be the same with me as owner?

Our man in Havana

pippip wrote: »

If I purchase a car and have a receipt but register under someone else's name. In court I legally own the car as it was my money that paid for it.

Correct.

Just because it says Joe Bloggs on the log book it does not mean that he is the legal owner at all.
A classic example is a car on finance.

stephendevlin

fred252 wrote: »

do you reckon the insurance would be the same with me as owner?

But you are the owner?

She has the policy but no financial interest in the car therefore the insurance comapny will not pay out on something that she doesnt own.

I cant take out an insurance policy on my next door neighbours house and profit from it if his house burns down.
Same situation with the car.

Im not sure if they would play ball with the liability insurance as you are required to own the car in order to get insurance on it. I may be wrong but insurance companies will do anything not to pay

Del2005

fred252 wrote: »

do you reckon the insurance would be the same with me as owner?

Unfortunately there's only 1 way to find out.

On your GF insuring your car, the insurance company should pay 3rd party but may not.

I was recently talking to someone who had to make a claim on their house insurance after the freeze. When the assessor came out all they did was measure the size of the house. The only reason why they would do this would be to try and void his policy.

Our man in Havana

For the millionth time, an insurance company has no choice but to pay out 3rd party claims.
It is the law that they must pay out innocent 3rd parties without a whinge. If they want to recover against the OP they can.

Del2005

Our man in Havana wrote: »

For the millionth time, an insurance company has no choice but to pay out 3rd party claims.
It is the law that they must pay out innocent 3rd parties without a whinge. If they want to recover against the OP they can.

Insurance is to cover you against loss. If they pay out a 3rd party claim and then claim back off you you are at a loss, that's not insurance.

You can say your 3rd party insurance is still valid. But you've paid money, usually a large amount, for an insurance policy which in truth is only valid for the Gardaí at a checkpoint/station.

Our man in Havana

Well no innocent person is at a loss as a result.

fred252

stephendevlin wrote: »

But you are the owner?

She has the policy but no financial interest in the car therefore the insurance comapny will not pay out on something that she doesnt own.

I cant take out an insurance policy on my next door neighbours house and profit from it if his house burns down.
Same situation with the car.

Im not sure if they would play ball with the liability insurance as you are required to own the car in order to get insurance on it. I may be wrong but insurance companies will do anything not to pay

ok let me re-phrase it. do you think a woman owner with a male named driver (recently on a full license) would be cheaper to insure than a male owner (recently on a full license) with a female named driver? neither with a no claims bonus and the female has a full license. so for the purposes of this question we're talking about 2 difference couples and 2 different cars.