Confusion over whos record a claim goes onto

loveisdivine

Can someone just clear this up for me, I'm a little confused.

I was a named driver on my husbands car insurance policy. At the time, I had no policy in my own name.

I had an accident in the vehicle and it was my fault, so there was a claim.

Shortly after that I got my own car and got my first policy in Ireland in my own name.

Obviously I had to tell them that I had a claim. I added my husband as an additional driver and put him down as having no claims. Because this was my first policy in Ireland in my own name and because of the claim on my husbands insurance that was my fault, the cheapest I could get was 3k!

For my husbands insurance on his vehicle (on which I am still a named driver) we are with the same provider so they have the claim on record.

Is that correct? The claim only goes against one of us, not both?

It is a little frustrating that no claims bonus can only be used as a dicsount on one policy, but a claim can be used to increase the cost on numerous policies.

grogi

loveisdivine wrote: »

Can someone just clear this up for me, I'm a little confused.

I was a named driver on my husbands car insurance policy. At the time, I had no policy in my own name.

I had an accident in the vehicle and it was my fault, so there was a claim.

Shortly after that I got my own car and got my first policy in Ireland in my own name.

Obviously I had to tell them that I had a claim. I added my husband as an additional driver and put him down as having no claims. Because this was my first policy in Ireland in my own name and because of the claim on my husbands insurance that was my fault, the cheapest I could get was 3k!

For my husbands insurance on his vehicle (on which I am still a named driver) we are with the same provider so they have the claim on record.

Is that correct? The claim only goes against one of us, not both?

It is a little frustrating that no claims bonus can only be used as a dicsount on one policy, but a claim can be used to increase the cost on numerous policies.

Both - driver and policy holder - and tainted...

loveisdivine

So theoretically, if it had been my husband driving when the accident happened and I subsequently got a policy in my own name and didn't add him as a named driver, would the claim still be used against me because I was named on a policy that has a claim against it?

In fairness, when I did get my own insurance, I explained that I was the driver but it was my husbands policy so they knew everything before quoting me.

If I'm looking at quotes now, as it's nearing renewal time, I put that I have a claim for myself. Then when I add my husband as a named driver do I have to put the claim down again on his bit? Entering the same claim twice? Surely that would make it even more expensive.

grogi

loveisdivine wrote: »

So theoretically, if it had been my husband driving when the accident happened and I subsequently got a policy in my own name and didn't add him as a named driver, would the claim still be used against me because I was named on a policy that has a claim against it?

No.

loveisdivine

I see. Obviously that's irrelevant now. But it helps me get my head around it.

Sue Pa Key Pa

The policyholder is the only person who claims on an insurance policy. You have an accident to be declared to a future insurer which caused €X amount of damage, your husband had a claim for €X

loveisdivine

OK so I'm doing a quote right now. Here are the next 2 questions.

Have YOU had any claims of convictions in the last five years?

Has NAMED DRIVER had any claims or convictions in the last five years?

How should I be answering this? Yes to both? Yes to named driver and no to me, as it was his policy? Or yes to me and not to him because I was the driver that actually had the accident?

Sue Pa Key Pa

loveisdivine wrote: »

OK so I'm doing a quote right now. Here are the next 2 questions.

Have YOU had any claims of convictions in the last five years?

Has NAMED DRIVER had any claims or convictions in the last five years?

How should I be answering this? Yes to both? Yes to named driver and no to me, as it was his policy? Or yes to me and not to him because I was the driver that actually had the accident?

It would be unusual for 'accident' not to be specified either in the assumptions or directly in the question itself. If the above are the only reference to driving history, your husband had the claim.

grogi

loveisdivine wrote: »

OK so I'm doing a quote right now. Here are the next 2 questions.

Have YOU had any claims of convictions in the last five years?

Has NAMED DRIVER had any claims or convictions in the last five years?

How should I be answering this? Yes to both? Yes to named driver and no to me, as it was his policy? Or yes to me and not to him because I was the driver that actually had the accident?

Just call them... The online calculators are useless when anything more complex comes in.

loveisdivine

Well I tried it all 3 ways and got the same price each time. Bizarrely it's about 1k cheaper than the others I've tried so far. I triple checked all the details and I've entered everything correctly. Not gonna get my hopes up yet though!

NUTLEY BOY

Conceptually, if a driver of another person's car has been negligent there is a liability on two parties.

The driver is liable for their own negligence.

The owner will have a vicarious liability for the negligent driving of the driver who, to use the relevant quaint lingo, is effectively regarded as the servant or agent of the owner.

Suppose that legal proceedings had issued in the accident in question. OP and her husband would appear on the proceedings as co-defendants.

grogi

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Conceptually, if a driver of another person's car has been negligent there is a liability on two parties.

The driver is liable for their own negligence.

The owner will have a vicarious liability for the negligent driving of the driver who, to use the relevant quaint lingo, is effectively regarded as the servant or agent of the owner.

Suppose that legal proceedings had issued in the accident in question. OP and her husband would appear on the proceedings as co-defendants.

Same if crashed in a rented vehicle?! Is the driver a servant or agent of the owner in that case?

NUTLEY BOY

grogi wrote: »

Same if crashed in a rented vehicle?! Is the driver a servant or agent of the owner in that case?

Effectively yes.

If the driver was negligent and proceedings were issuing the driver and the owners would appear on the writ as co-defendants.