Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I'm 20 and bought an ae86, what's the best way to insure it?

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    peteb2
    Registered Users Posts: 1,813 ✭✭✭peteb2


    And when the motor tax ask for a policy number and expiry date for your insurer what are you going to put in?

    Also worth noting that if you park this in a public place including your drive you're legally obliged to have third party cover on the vehicle which your mother won't have with a driving other cars extension.


  • Options
    #93
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Johnoae86 wrote: »
    But should young people be in the position were they have to fraud the system ?? Honestly take a look at learner drivers and the rules they have, its just insane realistically, yeah I no it pushes them to get full licenses I no from experience I had to get mine straight away at 17 to avoid the hassle of motoring as a provisional, but anyway back to what I was saying, young people should not be put in this position by insurer's, take a look at stats and I'm pretty sure majority of road collisions/incidents aren't mostly caused by young drivers, any young learner driver or fully licensed driver would agree that we would pay legit at a reasonable rate on a car that firstly had valid nct and tax, I can't justify a young person paying almost 4k for insurance on his or her own, its a money racket that insurer's can get away with so if there's a loopole young people can use to avoid getting completely ripped off let's use it until insurers come back down to earth and start talking realistically to young drivers,

    You don't have to. You have no divine right to drive any car at age 20.

    Creating a web of deception isn't legal and isn't moral either.


  • Options
    #94
    Needles73
    Registered Users Posts: 598 ✭✭✭Needles73


    peteb2 wrote: »
    And when the motor tax ask for a policy number and expiry date for your insurer what are you going to put in?

    Also worth noting that if you park this in a public place including your drive you're legally obliged to have third party cover on the vehicle which your mother won't have with a driving other cars extension.

    I think he's made his decision, let him off.


  • Options
    #95
    Johnoae86
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭Johnoae86


    peteb2 wrote: »
    So you came here with part stories to suit yourself. No mention before of your no claims bonus, licence status, or the fact you owned a car.

    So if you're happy with the cost of your insurance presently then stop whinging about how young people are getting ripped off for car insurance if you aren't. Your problem here is you can't access a limited mileage policy because you aren't 25.

    Just get rid of your golf so and do a sub to the other car. Aviva may not like it but they have to deal with it as your motor insurer.

    Are are you just crying because you want to have your cake and eat it and keep both. ??[/quot

    I don't think your getting the point I'm referring to older cars not newer cars to start with and how insurance is a complete joke towards younger people with genuine interest and are inthusiasts, insuring a car up in the years isn't my issue here so is completely irrelevant, I'm only referring to what others have spoke about on here to do with that particular topic, and obviously two cars are required as my other car which is classed vintage couldn't realistically be a daily driver , therefore a car is required for work also which leaves me with third party extension as some people here were helpful to point out and explain to me


  • Options
    #96
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    peteb2 wrote: »
    And when the motor tax ask for a policy number and expiry date for your insurer what are you going to put in?

    Also worth noting that if you park this in a public place including your drive you're legally obliged to have third party cover on the vehicle which your mother won't have with a driving other cars extension.

    123456789 is what I used to put on the form for my policy number. If you renew online I don't even think they ask.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    peteb2
    Registered Users Posts: 1,813 ✭✭✭peteb2


    FortySeven wrote:
    123456789 is what I used to put on the form for my policy number. If you renew online I don't even think they ask.


    They do. Date. Policy number. Insurance company. Are you suggesting he lies to department of environment.....??


  • Options
    #98
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    peteb2 wrote: »
    They do. Date. Policy number. Insurance company. Are you suggesting he lies to department of environment.....??

    Just use his policy number from the car that allows him to be insured third party.

    It's him that's insured, not the car. He's not lying.


  • Options
    #99
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    He can also request a second disc for the other car. Claim the first didn't arrive if you want it for free or pay for a duplicate of you suffer from morality.

    This way a guard can't charge you 60 Euro. You're displaying your insurance. Perfectly legal


  • Options
    #100
    Johnoae86
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭Johnoae86


    FortySeven wrote: »
    123456789 is what I used to put on the form for my policy number. If you renew online I don't even think they ask.


    The car will be legitamatley taxed as it will be insured classicly by somebody else therefore there will be insurance on the car and tax whilst the third party extension will cover me whilst driving it and that would only be once a week, I'm not trying to be a prick about it but from what I've read here this is the only alternative I have its the most cover I can apply to the car and myself, and to be honest at least I'm trying to cover every corner even if it just mean cutting around one or two I will make sure its covered to a certain extent, age is the issue and I firmly believe its not entirely right to put age limits of 25+ for things like this, there's a lot of chaps out there mad into there cortinas, mk1/mk2 escorts, capris etc..... And most likely are in the same predicament, I completely understand why a lot of people would look at this and have there negative opinions, because of stereotypical "boyracers" being the first thing to spring to mind when a lot of the time that isn't the case, you work hard at a young age to get something you love and are interested in and finally get there to find there is no hope of going any further until your of age is a kick in the sack, yes you made the point I should have looked into this... I knew insurers were bad... Not this bad, so I'm now forced to do things the ropey way to achieve my goals, it not that I want to do it that way, I would much rather it be legitamate but I'm afraid four years is to much of a wait and to long to see a car parked up gathering dust... That's my final word in this argument which I hope seems fare in everything that I have said, don't paint all young drivers with the same brush...


  • Options
    #101
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Age limits are not for you to decide OP.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Johnoae86
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭Johnoae86


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Age limits are not for you to decide OP.

    Never said they were but just starring it would be great if they rethink it a little and give younger people interested in the classic car scene a chance as well


  • Options
    #103
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Age limits are not for you to decide OP.

    No. They're for the previous generation who pulled the ladder up behind them in every way.

    Not least when they got on the horse.


  • Options
    #104
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    FortySeven wrote: »
    No. They're for the previous generation who pulled the ladder up behind them in every way.

    Not least when they got on the horse.

    Has it not always been thus?


  • Options
    #105
    ianobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭ianobrien


    OP, the tin can is a typical boy racer machine, along with the Altezza.. All you have to do is look at the knuckledraggers and their antics at the Rally of the Lakes and Donegal Rally. I should know as I've organised enough motorsport events to see the negative image they spread among the residents along the rally route. Basically, as a rally organiser, don't bother coming to a rally in one of them, we don't want them due to the idiots the tin cans attract.

    Sure they are a few enthusiasts who I know have them (totally stock and fast road) but they are show queens rather then for "spirited" driving. They are also insured properly. Face the facts that what you are doing is not "utmost good faith" with regards to insurance and could be regarded as on very shaky ground.

    Also, you'll have no comprehensive on the car when you are driving it. You say you have worked hard for the car. Wouldn't you then want comprehensive insurance on it.



    Don't take it the wrong way OP but please use paragraphs and punctuation in your posts. All I see is a wall of text that's hard to read & comprehend.


  • Options
    #106
    alias no.9
    Registered Users Posts: 6,294 ✭✭✭alias no.9


    If you're confident that your insurer would be happy to issue a policy to you with a third party extension through which you intend to drive this other car that they know that you own but you have registered in your mother's name, then it's all above board.

    If you think that knowing your game, they would make a different decision about insuring you, maybe refuse you a third party extension, increase your premium or refuse you insurance outright, you have not acted in good faith. In the event of a claim, they may pay out to a third party but they will be within their rights to recover their costs from you.

    There's a marginal additional protection for any third party in your choice of action but for yourself, what you're planning to do is little different to taking a copy of another insurance policy, editing the details and printing it out along with a disc to put in the window. It may get you through a lax checkpoint, but it won't stand up to any serious scrutiny.


  • Options
    #107
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    alias no.9 wrote: »
    If you're confident that your insurer would be happy to issue a policy to you with a third party extension through which you intend to drive this other car that they know that you own but you have registered in your mother's name, then it's all above board.

    If you think that knowing your game, they would make a different decision about insuring you, maybe refuse you a third party extension, increase your premium or refuse you insurance outright, you have not acted in good faith. In the event of a claim, they may pay out to a third party but they will be within their rights to recover their costs from you.

    There's a marginal additional protection for any third party in your choice of action but for yourself, what you're planning to do is little different to taking a copy of another insurance policy, editing the details and printing it out along with a disc to put in the window. It may get you through a lax checkpoint, but it won't stand up to any serious scrutiny.

    It will stand the scrutiny of the law. Not just checkpoints. It is legal. No court can convict him of any crime.

    We get it's not fully moral. It is however, perfectly legal and cannot be subject to conviction. The insurance company cannot sue for acummulated costs because the car legally belongs to someone else. (The legal ownership is determined from registration) and under his policy he is covered to drive.

    It's contract law and the contract is paramount. Morality doesn't come into it.


  • Options
    #108
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    Timmyr wrote: »
    Some insurers offer 3rd party extension (driving of other cars) provided the car is taxed and tested, and not in your name.
    I have been doing this for years with Liberty without issue, put the car in your mothers name and buy a 1litre to insure and for daily driving.
    To tax a car Don't you need to show it is insured?
    Timmyr wrote: »
    Mostly correct, except the car does not have to be insured.
    It can't be Taxed without proof of insurance?


  • Options
    #109
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    To tax a car Don't you need to show it is insured?

    It can't be Taxed without proof of insurance?

    The third party extension is proof of insurance.

    HE is insured. There is not a single car in Ireland that is insured. Drivers are insured. Its legal.


  • Options
    #110
    selectamatic
    Registered Users Posts: 3,923 ✭✭✭selectamatic


    ianobrien wrote: »
    OP, the tin can is a typical boy racer machine, along with the Altezza.. All you have to do is look at the knuckledraggers and their antics at the Rally of the Lakes and Donegal Rally. I should know as I've organised enough motorsport events to see the negative image they spread among the residents along the rally route. Basically, as a rally organiser, don't bother coming to a rally in one of them, we don't want them due to the idiots the tin cans attract.

    Jaysus that a bit rough isn't it? and it the OP's dream car and all :(
    Ya do tend to go on these rants every so often when you address area's of car enthusiasm that you aren't fond of (yet Ireland's car scene including the 1st gear crossroad warriors is still one of the most law abiding in the world).

    Ya shot down some young fella that wanted to lower a caddy van there a few months ago as well for pretty much no reason either other than that it wasn't to your taste. :confused:

    The op is looking for advice on how to insure himself on a car. He has been advised on several options available to him it's up to him to pick which one he wants. At least he's actively trying to get insurance and not driving uninsured, even the bare bare minimum is better than nothing.

    And I know you acknowledged that some worthy (in your eyes) enthusiasts own ae86 corolla's but I'm pretty sure none of them would approve of ya calling their classic iconic pride and joy a "tin can" or fans of their cars idiots.
    Do ye try ye're best to turn The Butcher Boyle or kevin Eves or the McGettigan's away from the various tarmac rally events around the country for fear their cars may attract a few "knuckle draggers" :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #111
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Let's recap here...
    1/. Young chap buys high performance car.
    2/. Discovers it's uninsurable.
    3/. Schemes to retain ownership but put parents name on the log book with the sole purpose of using 3rd party extension from a policy on another car to enable him be the sole driver of the car mentioned at 1/. above.

    It's a nonsense. It's deception and arguably fraudulant.
    I'd be surprised if there wasn't an asterisk stopping the OP from driving certain cars.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    FortySeven wrote: »
    He can also request a second disc for the other car. Claim the first didn't arrive if you want it for free or pay for a duplicate of you suffer from morality.

    This way a guard can't charge you 60 Euro. You're displaying your insurance. Perfectly legal

    I thought it was illegal to display an insurance disc on a vehicle that it didn't belong to?


  • Options
    #113
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    His plan is to put his Mum down as the "owner" on the log book. By doing so he's trying to disguise the true ownership of the car.

    That is an attempt at deception, and can void any cover, as he has not disclosed a very material fact.

    A second problem is the lack of a valid insurance disc on the windscreen.

    A third problem is that any tax on the vehicle would have been obtained with an invalid motor policy number.

    A forth issue is that the OPs name would be on record as a previous owner.

    While it's possible that he might get through a Garda checkpoint it'd be pretty obvious what's going on here to anyone (Gardai or insurance investigator). It wouldn't be difficult to put the pieces together.

    That would result in a conviction for no insurance, and record of having tried to get cover by deception.

    I realise it sucks OP but you can't drive your AE86 legally.


  • Options
    #114
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote:
    I thought it was illegal to display an insurance disc on a vehicle that it didn't belong to?


    Possibly. The point is though that the disc and the AE86 will obviously have different registration numbers.


  • Options
    #115
    Timmyr
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭Timmyr


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    His plan is to put his Mum down as the "owner" on the log book. By doing so he's trying to disguise the true ownership of the car. No hes not, his mother will be the true owner, whos to say otherwise? Opinions and hearsay are irrelevant

    That is an attempt at deception, and can void any cover, as he has not disclosed a very material fact. How could it possibly void any cover? He is doing exactly what the insurance policy states he can do

    A second problem is the lack of a valid insurance disc on the windscreen. I have never had any issues with that

    A third problem is that any tax on the vehicle would have been obtained with an invalid motor policy number. You dont need a motor policy number on thae car, you need a policy for the driver, as Fortyseven has already stated

    A forth issue is that the OPs name would be on record as a previous owner. and? whats the problem with that?

    While it's possible that he might get through a Garda checkpoint it'd be pretty obvious what's going on here to anyone (Gardai or insurance investigator). It wouldn't be difficult to put the pieces together. He is in no way breaking the law

    That would result in a conviction for no insurance, and record of having tried to get cover by deception. How could he be convicted for no insurance when he does in fact have insurance?

    I realise it sucks OP but you can't drive your AE86 legally.
    OP please ignore this, of course you can drive it legally


  • Options
    #116
    alias no.9
    Registered Users Posts: 6,294 ✭✭✭alias no.9


    FortySeven wrote: »
    It will stand the scrutiny of the law. Not just checkpoints. It is legal. No court can convict him of any crime.

    We get it's not fully moral. It is however, perfectly legal and cannot be subject to conviction. The insurance company cannot sue for acummulated costs because the car legally belongs to someone else. (The legal ownership is determined from registration) and under his policy he is covered to drive.

    It's contract law and the contract is paramount. Morality doesn't come into it.

    Utmost Good Faith


  • Options
    #117
    Timmyr
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭Timmyr


    FortySeven wrote: »
    It will stand the scrutiny of the law. Not just checkpoints. It is legal. No court can convict him of any crime.

    We get it's not fully moral. It is however, perfectly legal and cannot be subject to conviction. The insurance company cannot sue for acummulated costs because the car legally belongs to someone else. (The legal ownership is determined from registration) and under his policy he is covered to drive.

    It's contract law and the contract is paramount. Morality doesn't come into it.

    I think we are fighting a losing battle trying to explain it on here


  • Options
    #118
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Ownership is key here. We know that the OP bought the car. His Mums name on the logbook is just that. It's a name. It's not the true owner. That's a deception. The whole thing falls apart from that point.


  • Options
    #119
    Timmyr
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭Timmyr


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Ownership is key here. We know that the OP bought the car. His Mums name on the logbook is just that. It's a name. It's not the true owner. That's a deception. The whole thing falls apart from that point.

    No it doesnt! you dont know he owns the car, you assume he does, but your assumptions arent worth anything (no offence intended).


  • Options
    #120
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,692 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    We all know he owns the car. He's said so on here already. He's taking steps to disguise that. That's deception.

    The name on a logbook isn't prima facie proof of ownership btw.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    millington
    Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭millington


    the_syco wrote: »
    I'd be surprised if there wasn't an asterisk stopping the OP from driving certain cars.
    Yea most policies do say "No Twincams unless you're 50" :rolleyes::rolleyes:


    OP when are you going to show us the car :D


Advertisement