# Key Post: car insurance - cheaper if female is a named driver?



## Marion (13 Apr 2004)

*This was originally posted by CJH*


Myself and girlfriend are buying new car in next week or so. I have 5 years no claons bonus in my own name, she has similar but only as a named driver. We are both early 30's. We will both be using the car equally. Given these circumstances is it likely ot be cheaper to have me as the main driver and her as a 'named' driver or will it be cheaper with her as the main and me as named


----------



## daltonr (13 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Probably the second option.  Her as main you as named.
If you have a claim however it will affect her ability to get insurance, i.e. the claim will be against the main policy holder.
This is a point missed by the parents of some boy racers until there's a claim.

Incidently it's also be cheaper for a man to have a female named driver than to have no named driver at all.  I don't know why, but it is.

Go figure.

-Rd


----------



## Ceist Beag (13 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

"Incidently it's also be cheaper for a man to have a female named driver than to have no named driver at all. I don't know why, but it is."

Yup I can vouch for this. It worked out €150 cheaper for me to have my fiancee as named driver than to have no named driver, even though she is only on a provisional license. Don't know how it makes sense but I'll take it anyway! Their logic was that as she is in a lower risk group, it removes some of the risk from my policy by having her named on it!


----------



## Statler (13 Apr 2004)

*> Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named dr*

Would agree with the two previous posts, but you could try getting quotes on-line for both scenarios from sites like:

and
[broken link removed]
to make sure. The whole process is pretty quick and painless. Also, a comprehensive list of insurers is provided in this thread:


----------



## temptedd (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*



> Incidently it's also be cheaper for a man to have a female named driver than to have no named driver at all. I don't know why, but it is.



Maybe it's because they reckon someone is keeping an eye on your driving! :rollin


----------



## rainyday (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Just a general point (and not in direct response to cjh's original point);

Nominating the main driver of an insurance policy is not a matter of convenience. The main driver is the person who drives the car most of the time.

All those mummies who are supposedly the main drivers of the cars actually driven by the boy racer sons may be in for a nasty shock if a large claim arises. Insurance companies are very clever at finding ways NOT to pay out claims, so if they can produce evidence that the main driver is NOT actually the main driver, they will do so. This could leave mummy facing a large legal claim from the insurance company.


----------



## Csider (14 Apr 2004)

*Evidence?*

Any evidence of this?  Have never heard of it happening myself.


----------



## <A HREF=http://pub145.ezboard.com/baskaboutmoney.s (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: Evidence?*



> Any evidence of this? Have never heard of it happening myself.



Check the terms & conditions of the policy. In most cases RainyDay is correct as far as I know and anybody trying to pull the wool over the insurer's eyes is taking a big risk of the policy being rendered null and void.


----------



## Mikeyboy (14 Apr 2004)

*quote*

In reply to Rainyday .... there was a Supreme Court decision 3 years ago which has now set a precedent — no matter what you tell the company when taking out insurance (such as saying you're 50 when you're only 22), you are covered for 3rd party F&T.


----------



## rainyday (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: quote*

AFAIK, the insurance company will still payout the claim, but are also entitled to take an action against the fibbing driver to get the costs of the claim refunded.

But if you have any more details of that Supreme Court case (names, references), I'd love to hear more.


----------



## Dolly (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: Adding named driver*

It's not a gender issue (adding your fiancee/gf as named driver reducing the policy) - if I add my husband as a named driver on my policy, I get a reduction, and the same for him.

As an aside - we each own a car, full licences, each named on the other's policy, but regularly swop cars - if I've the kids with me, I take the bigger car, if not, I take the smaller car ('my' car). Are there legal implications to this? Am I driving his car as a named driver, or under the open driving aspect of my insurance? In the event of me having an accident in his car, would the insurance company refuse to pay out on the basis that my car isn't sitting at home in the driveway?


----------



## Csider (14 Apr 2004)

*Named driver*

A named driver is insured to drive a car.  Why would an insurance company refuse to pay out? Have they included a warranty or representation that they will drive the car only X% of the time.  It more likely comes down to car ownership as to who is the insured party and who is the named driver.

Rainyday you seem to have gone from being absolutely certain on this to being a little less than certain.  Not picking a fight with you on this but sometimes I think people are too quick to fly in with absolute answers when they are not really sure and that is misleading to people who rightly or wrongly take these answers as gospel.

My advice is to call your insurance company, on a no names basis and ask them the question and make a note of the response you are given.


----------



## rainyday (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: Named driver*

When you fill out your insurance proposal form, you are asked 'Who is the main driver?'. If you lie, your insurance contract is invalid. AFAIK, in such circumstances, the insurance company will generally pay out 3rd party claims, but will also pursue the policy holder for the costs of such claims.

Check out [broken link removed] which upholds the right of the insurance company to decline claims where the policy holder has lied. And [broken link removed] shows a further example of a declined claim, though for a different technical reason.


----------



## Csider (14 Apr 2004)

*Named Driver*

Second case seems to suggest that my point above is correct - person who owns the car should insure it as main driver.

Insurance contracts are contracts of utmost good faith meaning that you must disclose all material facts even if not specifically asked.  This is one reason why I didn't understand the debate over insurance companies getting access to the register of penalty points.  If you have penalty points and don't declare them then you have not fulfilled responsibility of utmost good faith.


----------



## rainyday (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: Named Driver*



> Second case seems to suggest that my point above is correct - person who owns the car should insure it as main driver.


No it doesn't - person who owns the car should insure it as the owner - person who is the main driver should be named as the main driver.


----------



## legend99 (14 Apr 2004)

*..*

I was told by Hibernian that if I was to be the main driver on the insurance I had to have the car in my name and be the registered owner also...

INcidentally I found the online hibernian quotes by far the easiet to get to in terms of a quote.

www.hiberniandirect.ie I think


----------



## Johno (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: ..*

Just to add my 2 cents worth.

cjh, You would insure the car in your name as you have a 5 year no claims bonus, your girlfriend is only a named driver on a policy and is not entitled to a no claims bonus only a letter of driving experience.

The question on a proposal form is "are you the main driver of the car? if not state the name of the main driver"
If you are not the main driver you have to disclose who is and your premium is calculated on the main drivers details.
So if mammy or daddy insure a car with young boy racer who is the main driver and this is not disclosed on the proposal form the policy will be declared null & void as it is a false disclosure. 

Hope this helps

Johno


----------



## cushtie (14 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*



> So if mammy or daddy insure a car with young boy racer who is the main driver and this is not disclosed on the proposal form the policy will be declared null & void as it is a false disclosure.



but how is anybody going to know who the main driver is? i.e Mammy insures the car as main driver and boy racer is named driver but  uses it all the time and has an accident how are insurance company going to prove that he is the main driver. very hard to prove IMO

or am I missing something something really obvious


----------



## rainyday (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*



> but how is anybody going to know who the main driver is? i.e Mammy insures the car as main driver and boy racer is named driver but uses it all the time and has an accident how are insurance company going to prove that he is the main driver. very hard to prove IMO


Don't underestimate the lengths to which insurance companies will stretch to avoid a claim. First of all, they will look to see if Mammy is dumb enough to be the main driver of what is really her own car. Then they will look for the CCTV car park tapes from boy racers' college/employer. Then they will plant a private detective outside the house for a few weeks to film what really happens with the car.

But that is really all beside the point - Are you saying it is morally acceptable to you to defraud your insurance company by telling lies on the proposal form?


----------



## DOBBER22 (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Absolutely   this is the only way some people can afford to have a car on the road :\


----------



## rainyday (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*



> this is the only way some people can afford to have a car on the road


And by the same logic, if the only way I can afford to have a car on the road is drive with no insurance and baldy tyres, that is OK too?


----------



## tracy (15 Apr 2004)

*re*

i have a commercial policy in my own name I had a small accident with a claim for €2500 so have lost most of my no claim bonus, when my policy becomes due for renewal I intend to let it lapse and just use husbands car when required on which I am a name driver,  mu question is will my husbands policy increase due to my accident bearing in mind the claim was against my own policy


----------



## DOBBER22 (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Careful now I didn't say anything about driving without insurance I do not agree with that.
I admit that is a problem but the insurance companies have left people with very little choice it's either pay thousands for twelve months cover in your own name or pay much much less as a named driver on a relatives policy at the end of the day most people just want to get to and from work and maybe an odd day trip as long as they respect the persons policy they are using then whats the harm :\


----------



## rainyday (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

So lying to the insurance company in order to get a quote that does not match your real risk profile is OK - but driving without insurance is not OK. I guess that a 'little bit' of tax evasion is probably OK too? And maybe a 'little bit' of shoplifting? 

This insurance companies have left people with the choice of being honest, but this seems to be a non-viable option in your book?


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

*"This insurance companies have left people with the choice of being honest"*

In fairness Rainyday, I think this is not true for a lot of people. Say for example the best quote a young lad can get to insure his €1000 valued opel corsa is for €2500 for a policy in his own name, for a lot of people this is not a choice (unless you think not being able to drive his car is a choice!). In this case no insurance company is giving the driver a choice if he wants to drive his own car. Now I'm not condoning what Dobber22 says as I don't agree with his views but at the same time insurance companies are by no means whiter than white when it comes to being honest and fair! Do you really think that grouping all individuals according to an age bracket and sex is honest?


----------



## rainyday (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Whether the insurance companies are whiter than white is irrelevant. If we as a society go down the road of letting people talk the law into their own hands through this kind of white-collar vigilante-ism, then we might as well just break down society and make it every man for himself. Let's not bother with insurance at all - if somebody crashes into you, it will be your problem to chase him through the courts.

The key point is that those who lie to their insurance companies in order to get cheaper insurance aren't really ripping off the insurance companies, they are ripping off the other customers of the insurance companies - By providing cover to a risky driver at a rate that does not reflect that risk, the remaining customers (you & me) are left to top up the difference when the claims come through.

If you can't afford to insure a car honestly, then you can't afford to insure a car. I could afford a nice car with insurance if I lied to the taxman or social welfare - Would that be OK in your book.


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Like I said Rainyday, I don't agree with what has been said but the nub of the problem is that people simply cannot afford to insure a car under their own name so they bend the rules to suit their situation. I don't think this is right but it happens! If the insurance companies were to reduce their premiums for young drivers to a sensible level then this might not be such a problem. Your statement that the remaining customers are left to top up the difference when claims come through also applies to young drivers - why should they pay such ridiculously high premiums when they might actually be good drivers, it's hardly fair just to say they are in the wrong age category or gender so have to fork out!
And don't be trying to make out that I condone being dishonest rainyday - where in my reply did I state that? I'm simply trying to show how insurance companies themselves are partly to blame for the problem.


----------



## rainyday (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*



> why should they pay such ridiculously high premiums when they might actually be good drivers, it's hardly fair just to say they are in the wrong age category or gender so have to fork out!


So if you were running your Ceist Beag Insurance Ltd, how would you assess the risk of drivers?


----------



## DOBBER22 (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Tax evasion, shop lifting....I thought this was a discussion about motor insurance :\  I do pay my taxes and have no need to shoplift your way off the mark Rainyday I'm not telling anybody to break the law I just don't see any harm in bending a rule when left with little choice as some people really do need the use of a car it sucks that we live in a country that lets companies get away with ripoffs but what are we to do just lie back and take it? Anybody I know who is a named driver is so because they couldn't afford the premium on their own and needed the use of a car for work ect..
And what about people on provisional licences without the supervision of a fully licenced driver are they all tax evaders and shop lifters too? Ah comon now :\


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Not for me to figure out Rainyday but that doesn't mean I can't point out the weaknesses in the system. But if you think its a fair system then you must be double jointed to get your head up there! :rolleyes


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Never fear Rainyday those fraudsters will be found out see below link  

[broken link removed]


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

So I assume that Dobber & Ceist Beag aren't bothered by the fact that their insurance bill are 20 euro higher (my wild estimate) than they would otherwise be if a significant number of other customers weren't 'bending the rules'? You are quite happy to subsidise these other lying customers - right?


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Oh poor you being charged an extra few euros :\  young drivers are quoted a few extra thousand euros for motor insurance and for no other reason than their age or in some cases gender that is why they have to bend the rules and for the record I had to sell my car as the premium was way above my means 2400 pounds not euros and glad to see the back of it got great pleasure telling the insurance company that I no longer needed their services and why not that they cared anyway, I didn't have the option of using a relatives policy so I waved goodbye to a bad debt.


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*



> for no other reason than their age or in some cases gender


This is sheer rubbish. The reason they pay extra is because all the data shows they will cost extra in claims.


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Rubbish....I think not tell me after 3 years of claims free driving how an insurance company have the cheek to quote you 2,400 pounds? The answer is they do it because they can get away with it not because the "data" says I want to go out and crash my car, look at the profits they have made over the last few years and you will get a clearer picture of how much they have ripped people off.
Surely you can see that they do charge an exorbitant amount for young drivers especially young men :\


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: > Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as name*

Read the MIAB report Dobber - and you will see exactly how wrong you are.


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Fact File on Car Insurance.


Only 6% of those who drive regularly are under the age of 24, as compared with the European average of 14%. (Source: Government's "Road to Safety" 1998 - 2002 report).


Average Car Insurance in 1998 was €609 (IR£480). Some young drivers are paying over ten times that amount. (Source: Automobile Association )


The Irish Insurance Federation says the relative claims cost for young drivers (17 to 24) are less than twice what they are for the 36 to 40 age group. ( Source: Irish Insurance Federation Factfile, 1998 ) 


42% of insurance premium is spent on legal and administration costs in Ireland. Across Europe the average is 10%. In Sweden where very few cases go to the courts, it costs 2%. ( Source: Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (DETE) Working Group Report on Personal Injury Compensation )


Irish accident rates are half what they are in Portugal and equal to the European average, yet drivers in no other EU country pay more for motor insurance than Irish drivers. (Source: National Roads Authority - Young Drivers Accidents Report 1997 )


The motor insurance fund in Ireland in 2001 was €1.2billion. Sweden with 10 million people and a higher density of cars had a fund of €520million in 1996. (Source: Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (DETE) Working Group Report on Personal Injury Compensation )


The following are a few examples of how much young people are paying for car insurance 
21 year old David Green is paying €4,430 to insure a Honda Civic despite never having a crash and a one year no claims bonus. 
A fully qualified 21 year old Aer Lingus Airline Pilot is paying €6,602 to insure his Audi A3 1.6l. He is trusted to fly an Airbus jet aircraft but not to drive a car! 
A 22 year old driver with a full driving licence from Rathfarnham was paying €2,831 (IR£2,230) to insure a 1300 cc Mazda 323. He had a crash and was re-quoted £4,300 to re-new his policy. 
A 24 year old driver is paying €2,400 to insure a Fiat Punto. Despite having four years no claims driving experience, his insurance increased by €630 this year. 
Total Premium income for all Car Insurance Companies trading in Ireland during 1997 was €902 million. €780 million was paid out in claims (Source: Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (DETE) Report, 1997)


British drivers lodge more claims than Irish drivers, but on average the Irish claims are over four times higher (Source: Deloitte & Touche Economic Evaluation of Insurance Costs in Ireland, 1996)


Only three motor insurance companies based in Ireland will insure young drivers (Usually under 27) (Source: MIJAG )


The average age of the workforce at Irelands largest factory (Intel) is 23 and most must drive to get to work (Source: Intel Ireland) 

MIAB Report attached: Recommendation number 17 is a good one!

www.entemp.ie/cr/miab.pdf


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

Try reading behind the headlines, Dobber. 

The MIAB report clearly demonstrated that the insurance companies were NOT ripping off consumers. In bad years, they were losing money. In decent years, they were making modest returns on investment, by comparison to other businesses. 

The real rip-off was the legal costs which make up such a huge part of the claims costs - but I know it's much easier for you just to rant about the insurance companies to justify the rip-off by consumers. That's the underbelly of rip-off Ireland that doesn't get too much publicity because it is just a bit unpalatable for the general public.


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

I can bet if your insurance premium was a couple of thousand euros you'd be shouting ripoff too or are you far too civilised for that kinda carry on


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

You can shout all you like, Dobber, if it makes you feel better. But if you actually want to solve the problem, you would really be better off doing a little research and looking at the facts of  the issue.


----------



## DOBBER22 (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*

I wouldn't shout at you Rainyday there are far more worse things wrong with the world I'm happy getting the bus but I do feel sorry for folk who are forced to pay high premiums because the are "too young" or even "too old" :\


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: car insurance - cheaper for male/female as named driver*



> but I do feel sorry for folk who are forced to pay high premiums because the are "too young" or even "too old"


Me too.


----------



## Csider (16 Apr 2004)

*Aside*

As an aside to this debate why is health insurance community rated and motor insurance not?

By Rainyday's logic all those old, obese, heavy drinkers and smokers are stealing from young fit people in that we are subsidising their health insurance but they are not subsidising our motor insurance.


----------



## rainyday (16 Apr 2004)

*Re: Aside*



> As an aside to this debate why is health insurance community rated and motor insurance not?


The cynic in me believes that is because the decision makers (senior civil servants, Govt ministers) are typically aged 50+, so they benefit from the cheap car insurance and the cheap health insurance.


----------



## Csider (17 Apr 2004)

*Not sure*

Note sure if you're right but it is something that seems to be accepted because of the way it is.

I know that penalties are being introduced on people joining health insurance schemes later in life but given that motor insurance is compulsory is that not an argument for the government to introduce a community rated motor insurance product.  I think something along these lines is the case in New Zealand and apparently works quite well.


----------

