Are you talking about your license (driver's license) or registration (tags for the truck)? Getting insurance with expired registration is not a problem. Getting insurance with an expired driver's license will be more of a challenge.
Most companies run the motor vehicle record when you do the application, and it will show that your license is expired. Most companies will refuse the policy if the MVR shows that your license is expired. There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it. The reason that most people do not want to insure someone without a license is that it is ILLEGAL for that person to drive.
You also have to be careful about the policy language. Some companies have an exclusion for anyone operating the vehicle without a valid driver's license.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 05:46 am Post Subject:
There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it.
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 08:02 am Post Subject:
They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
Yeah, right :lol:
It certainly doesn't make sense to insure someone who has no valid license to drive. How would they perform the underwriting when the driver can't drive legally?
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:48 am Post Subject:
.
.
tcope,
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
Are you saying that if *my* drivers license was suspended My wife would not be able to drive any of our three automobiles ? ¿ ? ¿
They are all registered in my name only.
Also that would mean that since I would not have insurance I would have to return all three License Plates to the Pa. DMV and be without Comp. coverage while the automobiles sat motionless in my driveway for the duration of my suspension??
That does not sound correct.
FK
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 06:29 pm Post Subject:
Tcope,
You mention the key word "knowingly." :)
Quote:
There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it.
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
I cannot name any company that would do it explicitly and knowingly. I have never reviewed any company's underwriting guidelines that said they did not require a license.
However, some of the bucketshop nonstandard companies turn a blind eye to it, assume that "one of the digits on the MVR was just put in incorrectly," slap an "Unverifiable MVR" surcharge on the policy, and move on. Call up one of the bucketshop nonstandard agencies (the ones with the full-page high-risk ads in the yellow pages) and pose as a customer without a valid license and see what they say. There are companies that do it--for a price.
Are you saying that if *my* drivers license was suspended My wife would not be able to drive any of our three automobiles ? ¿ ? ¿
FK, this is the other reason to allow suspended driver's licenses. Most standard companies will not allow this, but nonstandard companies will. Some of them require a named driver exclusion on the driver without a valid license, in states where NDEs are allowed. However, this is a different case than the original question, where I assume there was only one driver on the policy. You can't exclude the only driver, obviously.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 08:07 pm Post Subject:
Tina, no carrier is going to issue you a policy with an
exspired licsense
and honey, sorry but I just gotta help you out here since you've typed it the same three times...it's ''expired license''...
guys based on her other thread, i am assuming she wants to register her vehicle (either newly purchased or plates have expired) and she needs proof of insurance to do so, however she has no drivers license...so as far as a 'new' policy i don't know any carrier that will write that one...
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 01:31 am Post Subject:
I caught this on the other thread and mentioned that I thought it was part of another post. What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle? FK has a point. Can they sign some kind of form saying the wife will be the responsible legal driver or just transfer the vehicles over to the wifes name? These days, with divorce being what it is, some may have problems doing it.
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 05:12 am Post Subject:
What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle?
Hi folks, I guess the non-owners policy is just the answer to this problem, when the vehicle is registered in one’s name and the other operates it regularly. If the wife can transfer the title to her name, she can obtain full coverage on the vehicle since the non-owner policy would offer only the liability protection.
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:17 pm Post Subject:
What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle?
In this case if it's registered in the hubby's name, then he can get the insurance and all is fine, the OP cannot get ins herself because she has no license, and all states do not offer non-owner insurance...
FK has a point.
he always does! :wink: (mornin' fred)...
Can they sign some kind of form saying the wife will be the responsible legal driver or just transfer the vehicles over to the wifes name? These days, with divorce being what it is, some may have problems doing it.
Yeah something may be able to be worked out...but I assumed 'tina' to be a woman :wink: She 'may' be able to get 'some' carrier to insure it with her as the owner, but she would have to be an excluded driver, so that might be an issue in some states or with some companys I've actually seen some policys where the vehicle owner was excluded...but for her to go to any carrier, and attempt to ins a vehicle and the sole owner/driver without a license ain't happenin'...and i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time, which if true will cause a problem getting coverage in and of it's self let alone no license..then add in the 'reason' she's suspended...if it's suspsended rather than expired which I also suspect---(suspicious little twit today aren't i? :roll: )...if it's truely just expired, i don't know why in the world she just doesn't renew her license, then there wouldn't be an issue... :?
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 06:06 pm Post Subject:
Lori,
I suspect that you are right about the details of this particular case:
i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time ... then add in the 'reason' she's suspended...if it's suspsended rather than expired which I also suspect---(suspicious little twit today aren't i? )...
This is what it sounds like--a suspended license, and the vehicle has been uninsured since last year, when she had to show proof of insurance to get her plates renewed. This type of "tag business" typically just makes the first payment and then lets the policy lapse for nonpayment. This is common in tag states like Texas, Kentucky, Michigan, and others that require proof of insurance at time of registration, but there is no meaningful follow-up during the year to ensure that the vehicle remains insured. I was a product manager for one company that lost one-third of its new policies on the first two installments in tag states. That was not the business we wanted, but we had to endure it get get at the "better" nonstandard business--people who were trying to keep their policies in force, but had lapses now and then because of money shortages. High front-end policies and short-rate cancellation for nonpayment were the best tools we had for dealing with tag business.
I must respectfully disagree with you, however, on the availability of coverage:
i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time, which if true will cause a problem getting coverage in and of it's self
This is not a problem at all. Standard companies will not insure someone with no prior insurance, but for nonstandard companies, the no-prior nonstandard business can be quite profitable if you charge the right rate. There is no such thing as a bad risk ... only a bad rate.
Most people do not realize that more than HALF of the people in the nonstandard market have clean driving records. The reason they are in nonstandard is not because of their driving records; it is because they did not have prior insurance (or had a lapse). The rate is higher, but there is absolutely no problem getting coverage on a vehicle that has been uninsured, as long as you are willing to go to a nonstandard carrier.
The issue of no license (and you are probably right that is suspended, not expired) is more of a challenge, but there are bucketshop companies that will do it. There are some legitimate cases (like one where you mention that the owner is excluded, but there is another valid driver ... one particular case comes to mind where the owner was blind, but owned a car, and his grandson was listed as the driver); or someone who needs insurance to get their license reinstated with an SR-22. There are many nonstandard companies that will take those risks with a smile.
But even in cases like this one, where the owner probably has a suspended license, but probably intends to drive anyway, there are companies that will slap an unveriable MVR surcharge on the policy and look the other way--especially if the person simply states that they intend to get their license renewed after they have proof of insurance. I do not know of a company whose written underwriting guidelines allow it, but in these cases, they assume there was an incorrect digit on the license, surcharge the policy, and move on. Bucketshops rarely turn down business of any sort.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:35 am Post Subject:
Tinamarie,
Are you talking about your license (driver's license) or registration (tags for the truck)? Getting insurance with expired registration is not a problem. Getting insurance with an expired driver's license will be more of a challenge.
Most companies run the motor vehicle record when you do the application, and it will show that your license is expired. Most companies will refuse the policy if the MVR shows that your license is expired. There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it. The reason that most people do not want to insure someone without a license is that it is ILLEGAL for that person to drive.
You also have to be careful about the policy language. Some companies have an exclusion for anyone operating the vehicle without a valid driver's license.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 05:46 am Post Subject:
There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it.
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 08:02 am Post Subject:
They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
Yeah, right :lol:
It certainly doesn't make sense to insure someone who has no valid license to drive. How would they perform the underwriting when the driver can't drive legally?
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:48 am Post Subject:
.
.
tcope,
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
Are you saying that if *my* drivers license was suspended My wife would not be able to drive any of our three automobiles ? ¿ ? ¿
They are all registered in my name only.
Also that would mean that since I would not have insurance I would have to return all three License Plates to the Pa. DMV and be without Comp. coverage while the automobiles sat motionless in my driveway for the duration of my suspension??
That does not sound correct.
FK
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 06:29 pm Post Subject:
Tcope,
You mention the key word "knowingly." :)
Quote:
There are a few nonstandard (high-risk) companies that will do it.
They should not do it knowingly. It's a little hard to justify issuing someone insurance so they can drive... when they legally cannot drive. as such, there is no valid reason why a carrier would collect a premium for a risk that _should_ never happen. They might as well insure bank robbers in case they get caught.
I cannot name any company that would do it explicitly and knowingly. I have never reviewed any company's underwriting guidelines that said they did not require a license.
However, some of the bucketshop nonstandard companies turn a blind eye to it, assume that "one of the digits on the MVR was just put in incorrectly," slap an "Unverifiable MVR" surcharge on the policy, and move on. Call up one of the bucketshop nonstandard agencies (the ones with the full-page high-risk ads in the yellow pages) and pose as a customer without a valid license and see what they say. There are companies that do it--for a price.
Are you saying that if *my* drivers license was suspended My wife would not be able to drive any of our three automobiles ? ¿ ? ¿
FK, this is the other reason to allow suspended driver's licenses. Most standard companies will not allow this, but nonstandard companies will. Some of them require a named driver exclusion on the driver without a valid license, in states where NDEs are allowed. However, this is a different case than the original question, where I assume there was only one driver on the policy. You can't exclude the only driver, obviously.
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 08:07 pm Post Subject:
Tina, no carrier is going to issue you a policy with an
exspired licsense
and honey, sorry but I just gotta help you out here since you've typed it the same three times...it's ''expired license''...guys based on her other thread, i am assuming she wants to register her vehicle (either newly purchased or plates have expired) and she needs proof of insurance to do so, however she has no drivers license...so as far as a 'new' policy i don't know any carrier that will write that one...
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 01:31 am Post Subject:
I caught this on the other thread and mentioned that I thought it was part of another post. What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle? FK has a point. Can they sign some kind of form saying the wife will be the responsible legal driver or just transfer the vehicles over to the wifes name? These days, with divorce being what it is, some may have problems doing it.
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 05:12 am Post Subject:
What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle?
Hi folks, I guess the non-owners policy is just the answer to this problem, when the vehicle is registered in one’s name and the other operates it regularly. If the wife can transfer the title to her name, she can obtain full coverage on the vehicle since the non-owner policy would offer only the liability protection.
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:17 pm Post Subject:
What does happen though if a vehicle is registered in a hubbys name and the wife is the one going to be driving the vehicle?
In this case if it's registered in the hubby's name, then he can get the insurance and all is fine, the OP cannot get ins herself because she has no license, and all states do not offer non-owner insurance...FK has a point.
he always does! :wink: (mornin' fred)...Can they sign some kind of form saying the wife will be the responsible legal driver or just transfer the vehicles over to the wifes name? These days, with divorce being what it is, some may have problems doing it.
Yeah something may be able to be worked out...but I assumed 'tina' to be a woman :wink: She 'may' be able to get 'some' carrier to insure it with her as the owner, but she would have to be an excluded driver, so that might be an issue in some states or with some companys I've actually seen some policys where the vehicle owner was excluded...but for her to go to any carrier, and attempt to ins a vehicle and the sole owner/driver without a license ain't happenin'...and i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time, which if true will cause a problem getting coverage in and of it's self let alone no license..then add in the 'reason' she's suspended...if it's suspsended rather than expired which I also suspect---(suspicious little twit today aren't i? :roll: )...if it's truely just expired, i don't know why in the world she just doesn't renew her license, then there wouldn't be an issue... :?Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 06:06 pm Post Subject:
Lori,
I suspect that you are right about the details of this particular case:
i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time ... then add in the 'reason' she's suspended...if it's suspsended rather than expired which I also suspect---(suspicious little twit today aren't i? )...
This is what it sounds like--a suspended license, and the vehicle has been uninsured since last year, when she had to show proof of insurance to get her plates renewed. This type of "tag business" typically just makes the first payment and then lets the policy lapse for nonpayment. This is common in tag states like Texas, Kentucky, Michigan, and others that require proof of insurance at time of registration, but there is no meaningful follow-up during the year to ensure that the vehicle remains insured. I was a product manager for one company that lost one-third of its new policies on the first two installments in tag states. That was not the business we wanted, but we had to endure it get get at the "better" nonstandard business--people who were trying to keep their policies in force, but had lapses now and then because of money shortages. High front-end policies and short-rate cancellation for nonpayment were the best tools we had for dealing with tag business.
I must respectfully disagree with you, however, on the availability of coverage:
i've got a hunch this vehicle has been uninsured for some time, which if true will cause a problem getting coverage in and of it's self
This is not a problem at all. Standard companies will not insure someone with no prior insurance, but for nonstandard companies, the no-prior nonstandard business can be quite profitable if you charge the right rate. There is no such thing as a bad risk ... only a bad rate.
Most people do not realize that more than HALF of the people in the nonstandard market have clean driving records. The reason they are in nonstandard is not because of their driving records; it is because they did not have prior insurance (or had a lapse). The rate is higher, but there is absolutely no problem getting coverage on a vehicle that has been uninsured, as long as you are willing to go to a nonstandard carrier.
The issue of no license (and you are probably right that is suspended, not expired) is more of a challenge, but there are bucketshop companies that will do it. There are some legitimate cases (like one where you mention that the owner is excluded, but there is another valid driver ... one particular case comes to mind where the owner was blind, but owned a car, and his grandson was listed as the driver); or someone who needs insurance to get their license reinstated with an SR-22. There are many nonstandard companies that will take those risks with a smile.
But even in cases like this one, where the owner probably has a suspended license, but probably intends to drive anyway, there are companies that will slap an unveriable MVR surcharge on the policy and look the other way--especially if the person simply states that they intend to get their license renewed after they have proof of insurance. I do not know of a company whose written underwriting guidelines allow it, but in these cases, they assume there was an incorrect digit on the license, surcharge the policy, and move on. Bucketshops rarely turn down business of any sort.
Add your comment