when my son passes his test can he drive on my insurance without being a named driver
Total Comments: 17
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 01:27 pm Post Subject:
Misreps have caused a lot of claims to get rejected. They would say something during the underwriting and then leave it for the insurer to discover it at a later stage. That's not fair!
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 08:40 pm Post Subject:
What other insurable loss could result from one's relationship to a non-owned auto?
The vehicle can be used by someone as their main means of transportation but they don't actually own it. If the vehicle is stole, then this person has suffered a loss. If this person were to be driving and hit someone then they are liable for that parties loss.
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 09:29 pm Post Subject:
If you have fully comprehensive insurance, then you may be covered.
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 01:09 am Post Subject:
If this person were to be driving and hit someone then they are liable for that parties loss.
YES
If the vehicle is stole, then this person has suffered a loss.
NO
Liability is the reason a person may have a Named-Non Owner policy . . . because that's all it covers -- liability.
But only the owner, not the driver, even if it is the driver's sole source of transportation, suffers a loss if the vehicle is stolen. That's a property loss, and only a property owner can suffer a property loss.
If you don't own the vehicle, you have no insurable interest. And you have no insurable property loss.
The non-owner driver may lose his employment, income, girlfriend without transportation, but auto insurance does not cover those kinds of first-party losses.
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 01:20 am Post Subject:
If you don't own the vehicle, you have no insurable interest. And you have no insurable property loss.
Having said this, if you rent a vehicle, you are LIABLE for its full value in the event of collision loss or theft. But that is a comprehensive loss that can be covered under Named Non-Owner. The expectation of the rental agency is that the vehicle will be returned. They will suffer an economic loss if it is not returned, or not returned in a rentable condition. Obviously, they will have that coverage for themselves, but are entitled to recover under the terms of the rental contract. It's that financial contract that creates an insurable interest where one normally does not exist.
That discussion is not germane to the OP's post about letting his son drive his car on his insurance, the assumption being that the son still lives at home. If the son does not live at home, he can drive the vehicle with permission, but still has no ownership interest. Only dad suffers a property loss. Junior and Dad are on the hook for liability losses.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 11:58 am Post Subject:
"You can insure a car you don't own" ??????
Insurable interest?
The term "insurable interest" refers to the thing you are worried about losing, the car or the house. You cannot get insurance in cases where you have no insurable insurance.
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 01:27 pm Post Subject:
Misreps have caused a lot of claims to get rejected. They would say something during the underwriting and then leave it for the insurer to discover it at a later stage. That's not fair!
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 08:40 pm Post Subject:
What other insurable loss could result from one's relationship to a non-owned auto?
The vehicle can be used by someone as their main means of transportation but they don't actually own it. If the vehicle is stole, then this person has suffered a loss. If this person were to be driving and hit someone then they are liable for that parties loss.Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 09:29 pm Post Subject:
If you have fully comprehensive insurance, then you may be covered.
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 01:09 am Post Subject:
If this person were to be driving and hit someone then they are liable for that parties loss.
YES
If the vehicle is stole, then this person has suffered a loss.
NO
Liability is the reason a person may have a Named-Non Owner policy . . . because that's all it covers -- liability.
But only the owner, not the driver, even if it is the driver's sole source of transportation, suffers a loss if the vehicle is stolen. That's a property loss, and only a property owner can suffer a property loss.
If you don't own the vehicle, you have no insurable interest. And you have no insurable property loss.
The non-owner driver may lose his employment, income, girlfriend without transportation, but auto insurance does not cover those kinds of first-party losses.
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 01:20 am Post Subject:
If you don't own the vehicle, you have no insurable interest. And you have no insurable property loss.
Having said this, if you rent a vehicle, you are LIABLE for its full value in the event of collision loss or theft. But that is a comprehensive loss that can be covered under Named Non-Owner. The expectation of the rental agency is that the vehicle will be returned. They will suffer an economic loss if it is not returned, or not returned in a rentable condition. Obviously, they will have that coverage for themselves, but are entitled to recover under the terms of the rental contract. It's that financial contract that creates an insurable interest where one normally does not exist.
That discussion is not germane to the OP's post about letting his son drive his car on his insurance, the assumption being that the son still lives at home. If the son does not live at home, he can drive the vehicle with permission, but still has no ownership interest. Only dad suffers a property loss. Junior and Dad are on the hook for liability losses.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 11:58 am Post Subject:
"You can insure a car you don't own" ??????
Insurable interest?
The term "insurable interest" refers to the thing you are worried about losing, the car or the house. You cannot get insurance in cases where you have no insurable insurance.
_____________________
Loss Adjuster
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 05:50 am Post Subject:
The term "insurable interest" refers to the thing you are worried about losing
Not exactly. Insurable interest is more complex than that.
You cannot get insurance in cases where you have no insurable insurance.
Now that's a correct statement.
Add your comment