Well if you go to this video search on YouTube for for letting my girlfriend drive my Lamborghini Vehicle Virgins it shows his girlfriend driving car on public road. Would someone who drives a normal car have to purchase additional insurance to drive this car in America but maybe not. In another video search on YouTube for Teaching Anna to drive my Ferrari Vehicle Virgins it shows someone driving this car and it says that she usually drives a Mini Cooper could someone who drives this drive it on roads in America without any additional insurance or would they have to get additional insurance. Perhaps a Mini Cooper would be in the same insurance class as the other car but probably not. For different insurance classes perhaps people can drive anything below that but not above it. In another video it says someone who drives a supercar if some sort would have had to pay alot for a day insurance policy for Lamborghini or so is there actually something called a day insurance policy that you can get for a Ferrari and also in Britain if someone drove a car on the road would they have to have to purchase additional insurance or have some things to do with health and safety that they would have to get? Any more details on this in fact?
My supercar does not require additional insurance. I’m sure my premiums are higher than they would be otherwise, but they don’t require a “Supercar” rider or any extra policy addendum or anything like that. Anyone can drive the car and it will still be covered just the same.
Nope. The insurance premiums are based on the cars’ value and that’s set - they don’t care about much else, aside from theft protection and where it’s kept. It’s insured like a regular car.
What you might be thinking of is limited exhibition policies. With those, the car isn’t insured as a car because you’re keeping it for display. If you want to drive it, you contact the insurer and let them know and they can pro-rate you coverage for you to drive it (supposedly to a car show). This is what someone I knew in Chicago (well, Winnetka, a ritzy suburb) did with their collection of vintage Ferraris. Mostly the cars sat around, but once in a while they would take one out for a Ferrari meet.
These sort of policies come from insurers that specialize in that area; Geico doesn’t write such policies.
In Alberta, having a Class 5 licence lets you drive anything as follows:
A Class 5 licence also allows you to drive all Class 5 motor vehicles, which includes:
a 2-axle single motor vehicle
a motor home without airbrakes unless you hold an air brake certificate
tow a trailer with one or more axles if the trailer is not equipped with airbrakes
a moped, a recreational vehicle, or any combination of recreational vehicles and a trailer, if the trailer has 2 axles or less, and isn’t equipped with airbrakes.
So far as registering and insurance goes, the insurance would be higher than, say, my Focus ST, but the registration woould be the same. In other words, I could jump into a 488 Pista and hack away with theowner’s consent, or thier 35 ft motor home towing a boat. Something to think about if you go touring Banff or Lake Loiuse and see all those rental RVs on the mountain roads…
I agree that if I go to one of the Lamborghini dealers fairly near me and buy a Huracán, I’d insure it like a regular car…because it is a regular car as far as any local law. If it was some experimental or classic car that might be different.
The one aspect I might question is whether the premium would be almost wholly a function of the car’s value, theft protection and where it’s kept. I think it could also include the insurance co’s statistics on how likely are claims by/against owners of such cars, even beside the specific driver’s record. The value of the car is probably the leading factor in the equation though I agree.
But basically ‘super car’ is a marketing term for cars*. It has no particular meaning in terms of car insurance or drivers licenses, in the US anyway.
*is a completely tricked out Porsche 911 Turbo S a ‘super car’? it’s not far from the price and performance of lower end offerings of Lamborghini, Ferrari etc.
You can get a policy for practically any need. I have a friend who got a one day event policy for extra liability coverage when she hosted a small family reunion at her home (she insures everything).
My gf and her brother co-own their deceased father’s classic Galaxy 500. Their insurance policy allows them to drive the car 5 days a year. They drive it to 2 car shows a year (their dad’s faves) and get together every other month or so to work on detailing it.
I’ve owned four Porsches over the years, and I’ve been active on forums like Rennlist, Pelican and such for about 20 years. I’d say that nowadays people conflate super car and exotic car, and so no 911 variant is going to make the cut. The last Porsche to get there was the Carrera GT. Exotic and super car is not just performance, but materials and design.
That aside, if you want exotic car/collector car coverage, they care about value, where the car is stored and how much you’ll be driving it, which can bring down the cost. If you want insurance, you can call GEICO and they’ll based the policy on the usual metrics which will be more expensive but they won’t care if you’re commuting in your Lamborghini Miura.
But I’ve had both State Farm and Allstate agents refuse to insure vintage cars.
I recall that there was an article a while ago about it being impossible to insure the top end motorcycles (superbikes?) in Ontario. The basic logic was that someone who wanted to drive an over-powered rocket was probably not the mentality to drive safely and within the law. as a result, you could not own one of those because you could not get insurance to meet the law.
As for “supercars”… Basically, someone who can afford a Lamborghini or Ferrari probably has enough sensibility to drive it properly - and can afford whatever insurance they charge. We’re talking a whole different strata of price compared to a top-end motorbike. As for “is it dangerous to let someone else drive it?” - an interesting question is, what is the depreciation on that sort of vehicle? If you let your main squeeze of the month wrap it around a tree, are you looking at $100,000 or more between what the insurance company pays for a 2-year-old car vs. buying brand new replacement? Unless you’re Bill Gates, that has to be a consideration.
As for newbie drivers whatever a car does, most people become familiar with its response and how to handle it within a few hours, at least to the point of not putting it through the nearest plate glass window or guardrail. If not, well, your insurance will become very much more expensive.
AFAIK, insurance is based on the typical repair costs of the car, the usual cost of liability for injuring others (the same no matter how crappy the car that hits them) , and the driver’s record which indicates how likely they are to do something stupid. (Recent history is a good indicator of near future performance, my computer science prof used to say).
Yeah there’s also different definitions of super or exotic means. But I think a common (perhaps non enthusiast) definition is that implied by OP, that the Lamborghini and Ferrari lines, not just particular models, are ‘super cars’. In which case the very upper end of Porsche or Audi lines are not that different, especially in terms of the implication of the question, letting ‘just anybody’ drive it, and as mentioned there’s no special insurance situation at all for ‘normal’ production cars of those makers. Just tends to be more expensive, like the car.
The question seems to be, if you have a supercar, and let somebody else drive it, what is the insurance situation?
This is my understanding in the US. Everybody who owns and drives car needs to have insurance. Their insurance will usually cover them regardless of what car they are driving, as long as it is not a car they usually drive. So, the girlfriend will have insurance covering her and her Toyota Camry. It will also cover her if she happens to borrow a friend’s truck. It will not cover her if she owns a second car that she doesn’t bother to get insurance on, but drives anyway.
The reverse also happens. A covered car is also covered when the usual driver is not driving the car. So, if I let a friend borrow my truck, the insurance I have on the truck will still be in effect. If I let my kid drive my truck all the time, then I’d better put my kid on the insurance policy.
There are a few problems with the supercar, though. The girlfriend’s collision and liability coverage is scaled to whatever car she owns. So the $50,000 collision is more than enough for the Camry, but not nearly enough for a supercar.
There is also the obvious problem, if she is driving his supercar and has an accident, whose insurance covers it? Both? Does it matter who is at fault? What if it’s a no liability state? Those are all questions for the insurance company to sort out, and if it involves lots of money, it may turn into lawsuits. The one time it happened to me, I had a wreck during a test drive, my insurance company said they would cover up to the owner’s deductible. The owning dealership had a $50,000 deductible, so my insurance ended up paying the full amount of the repair, though I owed my deductible.
I read about a guy who was in a bad wreck in a $1 mil Ferrari and he walked away. The car was totally destroyed. The cop said “I guess for that price you better walk away from any wreck” I think it was the Enzo model.
No. While the average driver may have only 15/30/5 liability coverage, which means $15,000 per person / $30,000 per accident coverage for bodily injury and $5,000 for property damage, I’ve got 300/300/100 coverage because people are expensive to fix, and cars aren’t much cheaper. This is entirely unrelated to what I drive. If it “scales” to anything, it would be to what you have to lose, such as a house. This is also unrelated to comprehensive/collision coverage, which is on your car, not someone else’s.
The hypothetical girlfriend with a Camry would not have $50,000 collision coverage. She’d have comp/coll coverage in the amount of what her insurance carrier deems a Camry is worth. She can’t insure the Camry for $50,000, get into an accident, total out the car, and get a $50,000 payout. It just doesn’t work that way.
It’s also entirely possible that someone who owns a couple “super” or exotic cars may self-insure. In California, that can be done by providing the DMV a $35,000 cash deposit or a surety bond for the same amount. Over the course of a few years, this probably works out to be cheaper than traditional insurance premiums.
There’s been some debate since Paul Walker died in a Carrera GT and his family sued everybody within a 50-ft radius. Supercars have pretty much outstripped normal driver ability, and pretty much rely heavily on driver aids to keep some delusional hedgefund manager from killing himself. Even so, a lot are owned by folks with more money than sense.
Super bikes, on the other hand, are mostly bought for track use. No worries about insuring for the street, track insurance is relatively cheap, and less chance of some knucklehead on a cell phone pulling out on you.
- I tend to think the original statement was correct actually, and your impression more TV/movie type portrayals, with an actor (and 15 yr model yrs ago car) as example.
Really powerful cars are obviously easier to wreck than less powerful ones for a given level of general technology. But the somewhat contradictory point there is that electronic nanny systems really do a lot now. I can easily see that in my M2 (by no stretch of the imagination a super car but a pretty capable car, in turning especially). I feel like a hero running laps hard in ‘sport’ mode, then I can see I’m not good enough to always keep the car on the track at the same speeds in ‘sport+’ (stability system turned down, not even off). But the car is really good at going where you point it when you let it do the work.
And maybe a YMMV thing but excluding people who get rich enough soon enough to buy really top end cars when they are still young and stupid (I’m confident exotic dealer stats would show that’s a fairly small % of their customers) I’m doubting they generally tend to be dangerous drivers. It’s unusual not to see any Lambo, Ferrari, McLaren etc. at all in a given at drive of a few miles of relatively open River Road on the Hudson right across from Manhattan in Hudson/Bergen Cty’s in NJ, and I seldom see them being driven wildly.
- Whereas any motorcycle riding is crazily risky compared to pretty much any car driving. I used to ride motorcycles (young and stupid), no doubt about that in my mind and I think the stats would back me up.
Supercars only outstrip driver capabilities when driven stupid. People who amass enough money to buy a Ferrari as a toy probably have enough common sense not to drive stupid… most of the time, unless they make their millions in the movies portraying a crazy driver with too much testosterone. The occasional stupid person removes themselves from the gene pool pretty quickly. The reason I mentioned superbikes is that a very expensive overpowered bike is within the same cost range as a higher end consumer truck or car. It’s a lot easier for idiots to acquire them and then show off their idiocy on the road.
AFAIK, in most places insurance attaches to the car. Your car hits something, your insurance pays. If you were not driving or not at fault, then the insurance company can go after the person responsible - the person driving your car or the idiot who ran into you. This is why you have insurance, if the other person cannot pay, then at least you are made whole by your own insurance. The only onus on lending a car that I’m aware is that it is your responsibility to verify they have a valid driver’s license. AFAIK, my car insurance covers me if I drive someone else’s car too and am at fault. Not sure the details, but I have AFAIK $1M liability, since medical can be very expensive in some situations. Canada has free medical care, but that does not cover liability for extensive physiotherapy, lost income, attendant care for someone incapacitated, etc.
I am a bit surprised by that.
Kinda like Pit Bulls have a bad reputation (in good part) because irresponsible people like to have a big, mean ferocious dog and so the dog is far more dangerous than your average dog. Hence special laws regarding Pit Bull dogs in many places.
You’d think insurance companies would have statistics on what kind of people buy what cars and which groups tend to get in more accidents. Is the family Volvo wagon as likely to be in an accident as a Mustang GT? Are the injuries and damage incurred when they get in accidents comparable?
I am not saying supercar owners are more irresponsible than “normal” car owners. Indeed, given the cost and care for their supercar they may very well be particularly careful (I dunno). Is the same true if they hand the keys to a 17-year-old?
Tl;Dr: I would think different cars would show up in actuarial tables as different risks and thus have differing premiums that go beyond only the car’s price and age of the driver.
Did it cover him when his son and his son’s friends accidentally sent one of the Ferraris out the back window of the garage and into a ravine? 
Yeah, sorry, I was getting my terms a bit confused. Of course the collision coverage on a car only covers up to the value of the car. The premium is based on that value, plus other things, such as the amount of liability, deductible, driving record, etc. I was thinking about the liability, and your 300/300/100 coverage isn’t going to be enough when you total your (now ex-) boyfriend’s $1 million super car (assuming you’re the girlfriend in the OP). The girlfriend in the OP may have the lowest liability allowed in her state, 50/50/10 or something, which probably won’t even cover repairs on a supercar.
It may not be an issue though, as his insurance will probably cover it. Laws vary by state, and rules vary by insurance company. For State Farm at least, the car owner’s insurance will generally cover damage when another person, with the permission of the owner, is driving the car and is at fault in an accident. If somebody else were at fault, then that other person’s insurance would be paying. Lots of exceptions of course, for example if the person should be on the policy, but isn’t, or if they’re specifically excluded.
One scenario in the OP where it would be a big problem is if the couple lives together, and she even has her own car and insurance, but frequently uses one of his cars. She then needs to be on his policy, because she regularly drives his cars. If they live together and she rarely drives his cars, they might have to try and prove that when thet sue the insurance company for refusing to pay out. For that reason, I contacted my insurance company when my girlfriend started regularly driving my car. They put her name on the policy and it did not increase the premium at all.
One insurance option for cars here is “storage” which covers a car not on the road - i.e. for fire or theft etc. while stored, no driving.
Just a side note, a policeman once told me that they did not consider it theft if someone in the same household takes a motor vehicle for a drive. Since I’ve never had to worry about other (younger) drivers, not sure what the rules are nowadays. When I was young, in the Good Old Days, there was additional insurance required with a hefty premium to cover allowing teenagers to drive the family car. Someone hit my in-laws’ place of business several years ago while joyriding, and IIRC the 15-year-old was charged with “driving without a license”. The vehicle’s insurance paid for the repairs to the building.
Another thing I was wondering about it is why somebody would be added to the insurance of another driver. A time when my aunt wasn’t well my uncle put his daughter on the insurance for his car. If it is the case that if someone else owns the car and paid for it anyone can drive it what is the advantage to putting someone else on it? Also I was reading that the most basic type in the UK which is Third Party actually tends to be the most expensive and Fully Comprehensive which covers the most is the cheapest and if there is a reason for this. Also adding someone else for the car can make it more expensive but adding someone else an air it cheaper and if there is a reason for this. I was reading that unemployed people pay more in fact some unemployed person paid nearly 5 times more and I don’t understand what the connection between being unemployed and paying more also some people tweak their job title slightly and they pay less and why the job someone does can affect the price in fact?