Getting a Car Insurance for a Friend

• 

  nocure on 22/06/2017 - 08:59

  They will base the premium on the youngest driver.

  • 

    rockuman_ex on 22/06/2017 - 09:17

    actually no, because we did the online quote, put my details as primary and her as secondary driver (all above 25yo), and her insurance quote dropped significantly to $610 instead of $1400 if she's the only driver.

    • 

      nocure on 22/06/2017 - 09:34

      A friend of mine just got her driving license for less than 2 years.

      All good, I assumed she was under 25

• 

  Xetrok on 22/06/2017 - 09:19

  It really depends on the insurance company.
  They would probably list you as the ordinary driver which is why it is so cheap.
  Dependant on the PDS you will probably find that you will be required to list any additional drivers that you want to cover under the insurance.
  There is usually a higher excess for drivers under 25 or who have held their license for less than 2 years.

  TLDR;
  Check the PDS

• 

  rockuman_ex on 22/06/2017 - 09:22

  Thanks, maybe i should provide more details
  - both of us are over 25
  - the car is hers (under her name)

  Just wanting if there's anything that I should be aware of for having me as the primary driver for her car insurance.

  • 

    vinni9284 on 22/06/2017 - 09:57

    +1

    I wouldn't risk it.
    As the car is hers, then it is registered under her.

    In my view, many insurance companies are aware of the processes (or tricks) that people do to save money by nominating that the lower risk is the main driver although not the owner.

    If there was an accident, then they might give you a hard time to process a claim as they love to wiggle out of claims if there was an opportunity.

    As per other previous poster. Read the PDS and if it doesn't clarify, then call the insurance for clarification.
    And if they agree it is OK then have it in writing.

    Cheers

    • 

      [Deactivated] on 22/06/2017 - 12:08

      As much as I loathe to defend them, they love to "wiggle out of claims" because people start trying to apply very grey logic to reduce their costs. OP hasn't mentioned whether he is going to be the primary driver or not, so I won't judge, but in the 3 claims I've made (all not at fault) the insurer I'm with has been very accommodating, immediately approved the repair and repaired in a good time. This, no doubt, is because I'm being honest with them, and the claims are valid, where if you try and play the details you're likely to lose as they have a LOT more lawyers than you.

      My 2c

      • 

        vinni9284 on 22/06/2017 - 12:50

        You can defend them as much as you can however this is my view. If they can wiggle out of a claim, they can. They are no different to warranties.

        Many people try to do the right thing by giving full disclosure however, there is a lot of grey area within insurance, especially within their PDS interpretation/wording or in my view omissions or further sub-clarifications. The Health Insurance sector is especially very big on this. How clear is Health Insurance PDS?

        When people claim, the Insurance starts to look into circumstances pertaining the claim and some claims are not black and white as their are other factors in an accident. And if it is black and white, then they may process the claim with no issues.

        As you can read by my previous post, I am not advocating the OP to lie and I agree with you that honesty and disclosure by only answering the questions that they ask; whether it is an open or closed ended question with only as succinct answer.

        And .. yes the people that are dishonest deserved for their claim to be denied.

        I have also claimed for an accident not at fault. The Insurance paid. Was my car the same after the repair/claim: NO! The assessors look and try to wiggle anything that they think that is not part of the accident.

        "you're likely to lose as they have a LOT more lawyers than you."

        Why do they have so many lawyers? Do you think they always use them for dishonest claimants?
        Insurance is the one of the most lucrative business in the world. Why is that?
        I would say that 75% of ads on TV are all about insurance; pet, travel, health, car, boat, house, funeral ….etc

        Why are there so many issues/negative feedback with Insurance claims noted on ProductReview.com.au?
        Are they all dishonest claimants?

        They feed on the psychology of the "what if factor"

        Do you work for Insurance by any chance?

        Why do you "Loathe" to defend them? The term Loathe is indicating something negative.
        Loathe definition: to dislike greatly and often with disgust or intolerance
        https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/loathe

        I thought you are happy with your insurance?

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 22/06/2017 - 15:30

        @vinni9284: "If the can wiggle out of a claim they [will]", "wiggle out" is an interesting term in and of itself, they can't "wiggle out" of their contractual obligations so perhaps it's best for a purchaser to consider understanding what they are, and more importantly, are not getting.

        "Why are there so many issues / negative feedback". So side stepping the question of empirical evidence and heading into the bounds of hearsay because in actual fact I would probably agree with your insinuation, I will continue to play Devil's Advocate. I would suggest that the reason for so much of the issue is because buyer does not understand what they are purchasing, and therefore are disappointed in the outcome they receive. If the insurance companies were truely failing to meet the contractual obligations they would be found guilty by a regulator and be forced to pay fines (which, like all industries, they sometimes are)

        "Do you work for Insurance by any chance?". No, I work in IT in defence engineering. I have never worked for an insurance company in any capacity.

        "Why do you "loathe" to defend them?". Well mostly because insurance, like politics and religion are emotive topics, and not generally one of rational consideration. Just as with politics and religion if people could remove the emotion from the argument then perhaps a more reasoned understanding would be achieved.

        The way that I look at insurance is that it's a gamble (or as you mentioned "what if factor"). What is my potential risk versus my potential reward. Trying to increase my risk by arguing the semantics of an agreement as a single individual with no legal background versus an industry who deals with tens of thousands of these claims a day (and fulfils its obligations to a vast majority of them) seems like not worth the reward for a handful of dollars a year. This is my view and many, many people don't share it (I'm told on a regular basis).

        As for your comment around advertising on TV, I guess since I don't watch FTA TV (or see many ads on the web for that matter) I'm not privy to what constitutes advertising these days. As FTA is a dying industry I guess that might reflect the sorts of advertisers that are on there, correlation and all that.

      • 

        vinni9284 on 22/06/2017 - 15:54

        @unique452:

        My interpretation/view of a Wiggle is the fact of insurance companies, warranties and the like "purposefully" opting out of a claim when there it is to their financial advantage (when they can normally honour a claim in a similar circumstance) if they cannot reference based on grey wording within their contracts that can be interpreted differently depending on circumstantial evidence. E.g. "Acts by God" … I don't want to start another debate here :-)

        "If the insurance companies were truly failing to meet the contractual obligations they would be found guilty by a regulator and be forced to pay fines (which, like all industries, they sometimes are)" .. Yes however in my view for this be ascertained and proven, it has to be generated from a class action (i.e. high volume of people and financially capable)"… E.g. Such as the alleged ConBank poor financial advice saga that happened a couple of years ago. However an individual case by case basis and depending on the issue, then it is David vs Goliath and good luck!

        Regardless, I still believe if they can wiggle out of claims then they will. Furthermore, if they can wiggle during the claim they will.

        I guess there is no more need for me to elaborate on my perpetual opinions any further as I have made them clear … They love the Wiggles!

        However you are welcome to comment.

        Great chatting with you :-)

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 22/06/2017 - 16:18

        @vinni9284: Although I fundamentally agree with your sentiment, I think probably the best response (without a Godwin-ing the argument) is to say; Welcome to capitalism! ;)

      • 

        vinni9284 on 23/06/2017 - 13:43

        +1

        @unique452:

        How's this for irony… today's News.com.au story

        http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/cyclone-marcia-vi…

        "Only this month, after being contacted by news.com.au, did CommInsure give Ms Cranny money to cover her emergency accommodation costs, plus $20,000 towards the cost of her damaged contents."

        …..
        …..

        A CommInsure spokesperson said: “It is disappointing to hear Ms Cranny’s experience is not up to the standard we work hard to provide, and we have moved quickly to put things right.

        “We care deeply about providing the best service to our customers, and while the majority receive the right experience, we know we can always work harder to ensure this is the case for all customers.

        “We have taken immediate steps to address Ms Cranny’s issue and have agreed an approach to resolve her claim.”

        … yeah after 2 years … or more like after News.com.au contacted them as they now may have public backlash and lose money from a mass exodus of policy holders in that area.

        Wiggle it, just a little bit!

        Cheers

• 

  CLoSeR on 22/06/2017 - 10:05

  +3

  If the insurer finds out the secondary driver is the regular driver they may refuse to pay.

  • 

    furys12 on 23/06/2017 - 09:05

    well, op should read the T&Cs to make sure the secondary driver is allowed to be a regular driver, i was recently doing the round of quotes and most of them word the secondary driver part of the form as if the secondary driver can drive it just as much as the quote holder

• 

  beeawwb on 22/06/2017 - 11:09

  +1

  Disclaimer: Have worked in insurance for the past 14 years. This is general advice only and does not relate to any specific insurance company or take in to account your personal circumstances.

  Premiums are worked out based on factors like the age and experience of the primary driver. When you take out a policy you generally have to agree that the information given is true and correct and that all relevant factors have been disclosed (Duty of Disclosure - Insurance Contracts Act 1984, Sect 21) that might affect the insurer's ability to offer you a policy. If the drivers listed were not the actual drivers, the insurance company could say you have misrepresented yourself in relation to the policy.

  At best, if they found out, they would charge the difference between what premium would have been had they known at the time of inception. At worst, they could cancel (void) the entire policy.

• 

  tomsco on 22/06/2017 - 11:46

  I would say if you live at two different addresses, don't do it. It'll will be too much of a stretch to justify if a claim is ever submitted and you are queried.

  • 

    rockuman_ex on 22/06/2017 - 15:16

    that make sense.

    I'm just trying to help a friend. she's struggling with money at the moment.

    • 

      whooah1979 on 22/06/2017 - 16:01

      At the moment she's paying around $1400/year
      I'm just trying to help a friend. she's struggling with money at the moment.

      how pay for comp when she can't afford it? just switch to tpp.

      • 

        tomsco on 22/06/2017 - 16:27

        Haha, this is probably the first post where someone has too much insurance, not no insurance.

    • 

      CLoSeR on 23/06/2017 - 09:44

      If she can't afford insurance then maybe stick to public transport.

      • 

        rockuman_ex on 26/06/2017 - 15:13

        she lives in an area where public transport is not an option

• 

  furys12 on 23/06/2017 - 09:14

  Is $1400 a sane quote for honda jazz driven by a >25 year old woman?, last i checked 25 was generally the cut off for 'young driver' additions and being a woman is the cut of for 'male drivers are more risky' additions

  maybe i'm wrong and that is sane but i would start by shopping around quotes, secondly she should be looking into < comprehensive insurance rather then having you risk everything, and lastly if you insist on doing this then actually real all of the Terms and conditions in great details to make sure your situation is allowed, the quote forms might say "add a secondary regular driver" but its the T&Cs that outline exactly what that entails dont just ask and callcenter indian either not only will they likely not know you dont have the money to argue that their word should be bonding

  • 

    beeawwb on 23/06/2017 - 10:42

    +1

    I'm absolutely just guessing here as I don't know the specifics of the quotes OP has received etc, but there are 2 things that may be relevant.

    First, driver experience. Age is absolutely a factor in working out premium but so is experience. As OP's friend has less than 2 years experience and OP has more, that would factor in.

    That feeds in to the second point: No Claim Bonus. Different insurance companies have different ways of working out No Claim Bonuses, but what may be happening here is similar to above.

    Let's say that the company has a 5 tier structure for No Claim Bonus. I am making up these figures and they do not relate to any specific company.

    0%
    15%
    30%
    45%
    60%

    OP may have enough experience that they are assessed at 60%, and attract a higher discount. However because OP's friend only has 2 years experience they may not be able to rate a higher discount and so are assessed to be 15% or 30%. Accordingly, they will generally have more expensive premiums than OP.

    • 

      Noblejoker on 23/06/2017 - 15:42

      +1

      @Beeawwb - I do insurance like you
      Came here to point this out - but you have it
      most insurers will allow a driver of less than 2 years a minimal No Claim Bonus NCB
      If OP has his own cover and many years of hostiry many/most insurers will offer 40-60% NCB
      I.e. Full price with 0% discount = $1800 - less 20% is $1440 or less 60% is $720 p.a.

      • 

        furys12 on 25/06/2017 - 20:35

        @Beeawwb @Noblejoker thanks for the explanation, i understand the point of insurance and the downsides to what i'm about to say but dam for $1400 a year (even minus a couple hundred for third party to mitigate some risk) you could buy a whole new shitty honda jazz in a few years

      • 

        Noblejoker on 27/06/2017 - 22:52

        @furys12:
        Yes that's true - if you have single accident every 3 or 4 years
        But some people have accidents more frequently
        And don't forget that there are clear advantages t having comprehensive cover even if involved in an accident when the other side is at fault
        Also remember that a car worth double isn't double the cost to insure