I suppose this could go in GQ, but since it is hypothetical and probably bordering on legal advise I’ll put it here.
I was bemoaning the fact that I’d soon be adding a son to my auto insurance and my rates would skyrocket. My friend (not a crackpot, an investment banker) said his insurance agent told him not to add his son. He made the analogy that the insurance is on the car and not the specific driver. If I loan my car to a friend and he has an accident then my insurance covers it even though he is not on my policy. He said that sure if he gets in an accident they will be forced to add him, but if not he is covered just like anyone else I loan my car to.
So what do you think? What would happen if he did have an accident… would they charge back to when he should have been added?
Read your policy. In PA, when my daughter turned 16 we were required to add her. Even if she never got behind the wheel, having a 16 year old increased the premium. IANAIAgent.
Same sort of thing with me and my dad in Louisiana. He actually returned my license to the state in an effort to not add me to his policy, after which his insurer said he had to add me anyway because I was 16 and living in his house. That caused him to switch insurance companies; I have no idea what happened next. Presumably he was happy with his rates with the new company.
Interesting
I’m in MD and I don’t have to add my son to my policy until he actually has his license.
He can drive my car on his learner’s permit without being added to the insurance.
However, my insurance will almost double when I do add him.
When my daughter got her license, we couldn’t afford to add her, so our insurance excluded her. We were told that anyone in the household with a license had to be either included or excluded. (GA)
This is the correct response. Every policy I’ve read states that every licensed driver in the house, or any driver with regular access to the vehicle must be listed on the policy or excluded.
When my policy was written up (through my business) it asked specific questions about my household, including children and their ages. Years later, she turned 16 and poof she was on he bill.
I’d hate to be caught in a lie that is discovered when they ideally will be cutting you a big check or covering you in a suit…
Your friend is mixing up loaning a car to a friend as a 1 time deal because theirs is in the shop with having a driver in the house with regular access.
Huge difference in risk.
Very bad idea.
Also non family auto policy’s (I’m looking at you Mercury) exclude everyone except people named in the policy.
Just as a hypothetical (I think I’m channeling Skald here)… lets say that after 7 months the kid has an accident. Maybe I’m a great liar and tell them that this is one of the two times he was allowed to drive (probably why he had an accident), lets say they believe this… how would it be different than if it was my nephew I loaned the car to twice?
In case I’m bordering on soliciting advice for illegal activity, I’m really not planning on committing fraud… I just thought it was an interesting argument.
Oh, yeah… I’ve had the same agent for over 20 years so I’d guess he knows exactly when my kids turn 16. My daughter didn’t cost that much more, but when I asked him about my son he just laughed (and probably went out and bought a boat).
They will say he lives in the house and that increases their risk. With some companies it doesn’t matter if the kid has his own car they will up rate your (more expensive) car.
The example they will use is:
You have a car. Your child has a car as does your wife.
All three cars are in the driveway. Your son’s is closest to the house, behind that your wide old mini can and last in is your new ride.
Wife is cooking dinner and asks son to go get something from the store. Which car will he drive?
Your boy causes an accident. One of the first things I do in a claim is to verify the driver of your car (need to do this in order to unlock other parts of the claim software). If Mikey isn’t a listed household driver I send a message to underwriting who will follow up with you and/or add Mikey to your household drivers and the premium on one of your cars will increase accordingly when they process the change. Meanwhile, I will proceed with protecting you and your son from claims made against you as though you had acted in good faith with your insurance company all along. Pretty nice, eh? But that’s just the business decision MY company has made. Other companies might laugh at you and tell you, “Karma’s a bitch ain’t it! Looks like you need to pay for the damage your kid caused–and we ain’t fixing your car either because the accident was caused by a non-listed resident driver.”
It is absolutely the prerogative of the insurer to extend or deny coverage for an undisclosed resident driver. Your investment banker friend needs to stick to what he knows. Insurance is definitely not on that list.
Just felt I should add that one of my cars is currently in the shop being repaired for hail damage (act of God, not act of a 16 year old) and the process couldn’t have been smoother. They gave me an estimate originally and once it got to the body shop they decided the hood couldn’t be fixed and needed to be replaced. The shop handled it directly with Farmer’s and the only way I knew any difference was that the body shop called to let me know there was a change (which Farmer’s is paying the extra for).
I’m not looking forward to paying double or triple my premium, but I’m glad I’ve got a decent company to cover me.
I work in insurance and I concur with what he said.
You asked what is the difference between your son and your nephew. It depends on the state and the policy: on some if a non-resident family member drives the car with permission and they get into a wreck and they don’t have insurance, the policy drops to state minimums. In California that’s 15,000 per person for injuries, 30k total, and 5k for property damage, which, as you can imagine, is not a lot at all. Heck, you scratch a BMW you’re already out the five grand and unless the other carrier agrees to your limits you can personally be held liable.
