Named Driver Insurance Query

sally365

Hi,

Lets says a son had a crash in their mothers car, and he was a named driver.

When you looks for his own solo insurance policy a year later, does he have to pay a bit extra as he was involved in a crash as a named driver?


Or because he was on her mothers policy it should not affect him?

Thanks

bear1

I think he has to declare it. Also, if you dont NCB protection then the mothers premium will shoot up at the next renewal.

EDIT: was the crash big? minor damage? It happened to me when I first started driving at 18, rear ended an Audi.
We decided not to go through the insurance and just settle on a price - 500e to repair the damage to his bumper and light, so no claims were intact

sally365

It says on most insurance forms ''Any motor accidents or claims in the last 3 years?'', so many he does.

I thought maybe accidents were penalised at a policy level only for that person who owned the policy.

bear1

Someone with better knowledge will be along soon but you will both be affected in my opinion.
You as your premium will go up and his as it will be logged that the named driver was the person involved so it has to be declared to the new insurance company.
If he doesn't and he has an accident, they may well void his insurance and that's when the **** hits the fan

sally365

Aw this is over a year ago now, he caused a good bit of damage and they had to go down the insurance path.

He's looking for insurance now at the moment, I wanted to see if his policy should suffer aswell.

bear1

sally365 wrote: »

Aw this is over a year ago now, he caused a good bit of damage and they had to go down the insurance path.

He's looking for insurance now at the moment

Good luck is all I can say to him. Some insurance companies do checks so I'd be advising against lying to them.
May I ask how much the claim was for? Although I'm not sure if it makes a difference to the amount they will increase it by

sally365

Yeah he wouldn't lie, I wouldn't advise that either, the insurance companies are taking that crash into account..I was kinda hoping maybe they couldn't as the policy wasn't in his name at the time of the crash.

The damage i think was over €800, the dude who was hit was a chancer and wanted to go via insurance company

Henry Ford III

It must be declared (the question on the proposal is clearcut).

kaimera

mini hijack

When it says accident or claim, is that a claim against your own insurance or does it include you v a 3P claims?

sally365

Thats a very good point actually some say, have you made a claim within the last few years, a claim is not = an accident

Actually they all say - Any motor accidents or claims in the last 3 years? - So yes, it's still Yes for him

bear1

The insurance co will only care that you have made a claim, whether it be a windscreen claim or crash is still a claim

sally365

Yeah but the policy holder made the claim and not him.

bear1

I dont think it matters. Probably best to ask the insurance company

CiniO

Simple - if while obtaining his insurance he will be asked - have you had any claims within last 5 years - answer is NO - because he didn't have any claims.
If the question will be - have you had any accidents in the last 5 years - then answer is YES - as he had accident.

Anan1

sally365 wrote: »

Hi,

Lets says a son had a crash in their mothers car, and he was a named driver.

When you looks for his own solo insurance policy a year later, does he have to pay a bit extra as he was involved in a crash as a named driver?


Or because he was on her mothers policy it should not affect him?

Thanks

Both, I'm afraid - the son because he had an accident and the mother because she had a claim on her policy. I know this because I was that son..

sally365 wrote: »

The damage i think was over €800, the dude who was hit was a chancer and wanted to go via insurance company

There's nothing off about going through the insurance, it's the safest way for the person claiming.

peteb2

If you are asking will it impact any pricing? Yes - because he won't have named driver experience claims-free. Not because he's had a claim though.

It will also impact the people prepared to quote - a number of online options wont do it if you dont fit the criteria.

TwoShedsJackson

sally365 wrote: »

The damage i think was over €800, the dude who was hit was a chancer and wanted to go via insurance company

Why does that make him a chancer?

Most people are all 'oh yeah I'll pay cash don't worry about the insurance companies' until they actually get the €1000+ estimate for the repairs.

sally365

The guy he crashed into was working for a local company at the time (he was in a business van), so the company claimed for damages and other things like stress etc etc. Literally there was 100euro damage to the van.

The same man laughed months afterwards about the entire thing.

Anan1

sally365 wrote: »

The guy he crashed into was working for a local company at the time (he was in a business van), so the company claimed for damages and other things like stress etc etc. Literally there was 100euro damage to the van.

The same man laughed months afterwards about the entire thing.

How cam a company claim for stress? And for a grand total of €800, less €100 for damage to the van? I'm sorry but that's just not credible in the slightest.

TwoShedsJackson

sally365 wrote: »

Literally there was 100euro damage to the van.

There literally wasn't, because you didn't assess it.

Do you realise that the insurance company are only going to pay out for actual damage/repairs? They're not there for this guy to supposedly make a profit off being hit by your son.

bear1

Something doesn't add up here. The company put in a claim for stress? This would be laughed at immediately by the insurance company if that was the case. 100e damage? Again that seems too little, was it a scratch on the bumper or something?

Pedro K

What age is the son? If he's between 18-24 ring First Ireland brokers. They may have a deal with a specific company that suits his needs.

MugMugs

sally365 wrote: »

Yeah but the policy holder made the claim and not him.

Try use that excuse and let us know how you get on when you're left with a wreck of a car and no way of replacing it because you've been declined.

sally365 wrote: »

Thats a very good point actually some say, have you made a claim within the last few years, a claim is not = an accident

Actually they all say - Any motor accidents or claims in the last 3 years? - So yes, it's still Yes for him

They still like to know Accident details irrespective of claims.

Mainly because if you've got somebody who bounces off every wall on the way to work, you hardly want them on your books irrespective of if they claim for the loss or damage

MugMugs

bear1 wrote: »

Something doesn't add up here. The company put in a claim for stress? This would be laughed at immediately by the insurance company if that was the case. 100e damage? Again that seems too little, was it a scratch on the bumper or something?

Any "stress" claim if even successful would have to be made by the driver of the Van and not the company.

€100 damage claims also have other factors involved. I mean, If I had a van that was equipped for specialist jobs had to take it off the road for repairs that were not my fault then I am down money and I am suffering loss of use. I'd expect to be compensated for that loss.

And no disrespects to the OP but I've heard of instances where "There's no damage to the other party, just a little scratch" and had claimants with broken limbs and vehicles shortened by a few feet so I am treating that "€100" statement with a big pinch of salt.

bear1

MugMugs wrote: »

Any "stress" claim if even successful would have to be made by the driver of the Van and not the company.

€100 damage claims also have other factors involved. I mean, If I had a van that was equipped for specialist jobs had to take it off the road for repairs that were not my fault then I am down money and I am suffering loss of use. I'd expect to be compensated for that loss.

And no disrespects to the OP but I've heard of instances where "There's no damage to the other party, just a little scratch" and had claimants with broken limbs and vehicles shortened by a few feet so I am treating that "€100" statement with a big pinch of salt.

You have a point about the loss of work part, hadn't thought of that

mb1725

sally365 wrote: »

Aw this is over a year ago now, he caused a good bit of damage and they had to go down the insurance path.

He's looking for insurance now at the moment, I wanted to see if his policy should suffer aswell.

€100 ?

mathepac

bear1 wrote: »

The insurance co will only care that you have made a claim, whether it be a windscreen claim or crash is still a claim

That is untrue. Any insurance policy I've ever had states that windscreen / glass claims do not effect the NCB.

MugMugs

mathepac wrote: »

That is untrue. Any insurance policy I've ever had states that windscreen / glass claims do not effect the NCB.

Have you had all policies going?

If one had Comp cover and no windscreen cover, one could still comp claim for a windscreen and lose their NCB.

bear1

mathepac wrote: »

That is untrue. Any insurance policy I've ever had states that windscreen / glass claims do not effect the NCB.

My mother lost some of her NCB after claiming for a windscreen.

CiniO

bear1 wrote: »

My mother lost some of her NCB after claiming for a windscreen.

Did she have windscreen cover?

MugMugs

MugMugs wrote: »

They still like to know Accident details irrespective of claims.

Mainly because if you've got somebody who bounces off every wall on the way to work, you hardly want them on your books irrespective of if they claim for the loss or damage

Surely people don't mention accidents unless there was a claim though. Isn't that the whole idea of paying to fix your car or someone else's rather than going through insurance so that it's kept off the books so to speak?

bear1

CiniO wrote: »

Did she have windscreen cover?

I believe she didnt. But it was still treated as a claim even though no other cars were involved.
So I'd imagine that this son would have higher premiums due to having a crash

MugMugs

Emmanuel Sticky Coffeepot wrote: »

Surely people don't mention accidents unless there was a claim though. Isn't that the whole idea of paying to fix your car or someone else's rather than going through insurance so that it's kept off the books so to speak?

Generally not but if the question is asked an answer "should" be forthcoming

mathepac

MugMugs wrote: »

Have you had all policies going?

If one had Comp cover and no windscreen cover, one could still comp claim for a windscreen and lose their NCB.

No but I've had a representative selection, more than enough to give the lie to this blanket statement:-

bear1 wrote: »

The insurance co will only care that you have made a claim, whether it be a windscreen claim or crash is still a claim

So I repeat "That is untrue. Any insurance policy I've ever had states that windscreen / glass claims do not effect the NCB."

Is that clear enough for you?

You can pose all the hypothetical scenarios you like, such as it not applying while driving on the UKIP annual pilgrimage to BongoBongoland, but my statement stands on its merits.

CiniO

bear1 wrote: »

I believe she didnt. But it was still treated as a claim even though no other cars were involved.

See but that's the whole point.
If there wasn't windscreen cover, her windscreen was fixed from normal "own vehicle damage" part of policy which is included in comprehensive cover. And this would obviously cause NCB to go away.

It doesn't matter if it was just 250quid worth windscreen broken, or 40k worth car completely written off.
If it's claimed against "own car damage" part of policy, it will affect NCB.
That's why all windscreen claims should be claimed under windscreen cover policy, and if there is none, it's probably better to replace windscreen yourself.

bear1

mathepac wrote: »

No but I've had a representative selection, more than enough to give the lie to this blanket statement:-
So I repeat "That is untrue. Any insurance policy I've ever had states that windscreen / glass claims do not effect the NCB."

Is that clear enough for you?

You can pose all the hypothetical scenarios you like, such as it not applying while driving on the UKIP annual pilgrimage to BongoBongoland, but my statement stands on its merits.

Why are you getting snotty towards me about it? Do I have to agree with you because your insurance states that?
Jesus whatever you've made your point now move on :rolleyes:
Also another thing, I only wrote that once, why you saw fit to quote it again and why you chose to make it "clear" for me again I don't know.

mathepac

bear1 wrote: »

Why are you getting snotty towards me about it? Do I have to agree with you because your insurance states that?
Jesus whatever you've made your point now move on
Also another thing, I only wrote that once, why you saw fit to quote it again and why you chose to make it "clear" for me again I don't know.

It is perfectly clear to any reasonable reader that the remarks in my post which you quoted above are not for your benefit. They are a rebuttal to the moderator's questioning of the depth of knowledge I have about the subject here:

MugMugs wrote: »

Have you had all policies going? ...

At least that's my polite interpretation of the question.

When I said that your statement

bear1 wrote: »

The insurance co will only care that you have made a claim, whether it be a windscreen claim or crash is still a claim

was untrue based on my personal experience, I was responding to the moderator's questioning of my knowledge.

I hope that's cleared the sequence of events for you. Even though I quoted your untrue post I did it for other posters' benefit.

bear1

You call my quote a lie and a blanket statement and yet this is of benefit to others?
Anyway, this tit for tat is of no use to the OP so I'm backing out of this thread

mathepac

bear1 wrote: »

You call my quote a lie ...

No I never did.

bear1

@Mathepac, I read your post number 34.. where it says "to give the lie to this blanket statement" - I read this wrong and thought you meant that my statement was a lie.
So let's leave it here.. To the OP - get the person to tell the truth to the insurance company or it's going to bite him in the ass if any accident was to ever happen

kaimera

Another minor hijack

I had a motorcycle accident.

Would this need to be disclosed on the car insurance form? (not my fault, 3p paid)