how to get auto insurance under this situation

What is the name of your state? What is the name of your state? Hi, don't know if you have ever ran into this situation...and I want to help a friend out, as I just found out the situtation. My friend's daughter (21 lives in KY) has apparently been driving without insurance for say 3 years. She is a licensed driver, and was insured under her mothers car insurance, say as a sudent in high school. The mother's insurance list the father and the mother as 'insured' but not the daughter. The mother owns the car and has 'given' the car to the daugher to drive to college, work etc for 3 years. NO accidents, no police stops. The CAR has insurance, and insurance is paid. IF the police would have stopped the car (routine stop etc) she (daughter) could have shown 'proof of insurance' in her mothers name..if she had to. The daugher does not live with the mother (lives with her boyfriend who she will marry in a few months.) the boy friend also drives the car, but HE has a car with his own insurance. CAN she NOW get insurance on her mothers insurance policy if she does NOT live with her mother? Will they ask 'what insurance did she have for the past 3 years?' What are the consequences of driving the car like this in Kentucky? If she was invoved in an accident (even NOT her fault) could the other insurance company fail to pay claim? Is the car the insurred or the person the insurred? Again, the mother has insurance but the daughter is NOT listed. A can of worm, can anyone advise what to do???? thanks eaglescout

This is eaglescout...in case you did not see it above, the state is Kentucky.

look a it this way , the mother is stealing from the insurance company by not putting her daughter on the insurance and PAYING the increaed premiums.

What do you think the insurance company will say when they find out?

They will deny all claims, and mom and dughter will have to pay the claim out of their pockets.Or hire a lawyer to sue the other party in an accident.

Theft is theft, and by not paying the higher insurance rates to legally cover her dughter, she can be really really screwed....

So tell her to pay up, or reposess the car from the daughter.

rammmrod, thanks for the frank reply, and i agree with your assement, however my questions is more an legal question. it is my undersanding that in Kentucky the auto is insurred, and if you give permission for someone to drive your car, your insurrance covers primiary? If this person did not have insurance, say a cousin came in town, drove your car for a day or so was involved in an accident (lets assume not even his/her fault)..the insurance company would pay. I agree in principal what your saying and IF an accident occured and was her fault both insurance companies would/could look at things differently.My questions is more of an uninsurred motorist concern...and being legal to drive the car? Any commens?

the insurance compnay will never cover an unuthorized driver. The mom may get away with it once for her daughter, but since the daughter does not live at home or in the same town the insurance company will deny the claim.

then she is screwed.

but if the daughter who shouldnt be driving the car in the first place, lets the dummy boyfriend drive it, then his insurance will be sued to pay for the damages. but if he has no insurance, then the mother will have a dmaged car no one to pay for it

and the best part, the MOM and DAD ( who own the car)could lose their licenses for letting an uninsured driver drive the car.

[RunningOnEmpty]

It all depends on the language of the insured person's policy.

Many policies will afford the full protection of the policy, if the driver was driving with the permission of the insured person.

Many policies will afford full protection to any person living in the insured's household who is related by blood, marriage or adoption. Coverage applies regardless of whether or not the driver was rated or listed as a driver on the policy.


Other policies may afford SOME protection, but may reduce the limits of liability to that of that particular state's financial responsibilty law.

Others may totally exclude drivers which are not rated on the policy.

As far as being an unrated driver of the insured vehicle, yep, the insurance company is getting ripped off. It happens all the time. The insurance company doesn't know about little Mary or Johnny until they have an accident in the insured vehicle. And that doesn't necessarily mean they will deny the claim.

You really have to read the policy to know who/what will be covered and who/what won't be covered.

As far as the unrated driver obtaining their own insurance and explaining why they have had a license for three years, but no insurance in their own name.....

That driver should tell the insurance agent that you have not had insurance in their own name, but have driven insured vehicles
belonging to others. Otherwise, they will think this person has been very irresponsible and driving without insurance.

It is certainly possible to obtain insurance without having previous insurance. Everybody starts somewhere.

[stephenk]

the difference is that the daughter is the sole and continuous user of the car. The insurance company would deny any claim involving the daughter in a heartbeat.

[RunningOnEmpty]

I work for a major carrier in California. Our policy would not deny coverage, even though the vehicle was available for the sole and continuous use of the unrated driver.

It boils down to the policy language for each specific carrier.

Our policy states an "insured person" is 1) the insured and any family member (blood, marriage, adoption) who resides in insured's household 2) any person using the insured vehicle.

Our BIPD limits would drop down to 15/30/5 for the person described in #2., the permissive user who was not a resident relative and who was not rated on the policy. Our policy is endorsed to this effect.

The policy further states that an "insured person" DOES NOT mean 1)The United States of America or any of it's agencies 2)Any person for Bodily Injury or Property Damage arising from the operation of a vehicle by that person as an employee of the United States Government when the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act apply and 3)any person who uses a vehicle without having sufficient reason to believe that the use is with the permission of the owner.

Our "Exclusions" never mention that coverage will not apply to an unrated person who is the sole and continous operator of the vehicle.

Based on my company's policy language, we would have no basis to deny coverage, only to drop down the liability limits to 15/30/5. They qualify as an "insured person" by virtue of operating the vehicle with our insured's permission and because their sole and continuous use of the vehicle is not excluded.

We would deny coverage only in the event that the individual driving was excluded by endorsement.

My company does not consider misrating (cheating) as a basis for rescision of a policy. If we would have written the policy, even at a higher premium, then it is considered misrating and not material misrepresentation. If, given the true driver's information, we would have NOT written the policy at all (i.e. a suspended driver's license, too many accidents/tickets, etc), then we would declare a material misrepresentation, rescind the policy and deny coverage.

Fraud is too hard and too risky. Too easy for the Mom to say "oh gee whiz, I thought I had added Missy to my policy. I'm sure I told Hubby to do it. You mean he never did? Oh my." Just too hard to prove, so we don't bother. That's just my company, though.

many thanks to runningonempty for his/her suggestions, comments and advice. I have told my friend to read their policy asap and GET her insurred.

One question to 'all' that remains: Can she still get on her MOM's policy, being 21, and not living with her parents? She has to drive that car, she does not have another car to drive. How is that done? Does she or her mother say "...what do we have to do to put my daugher on this policy so that she can drive this car (and obviously any other car with their permission?)...." The car is the issue, that is her transportation, she does not have the money to buy a car. I suggested that her mom, transferr the car to her name, and she then gets 'insurance' on the car as the owner. But is their anyother way that her mom can keep the car and she can get insurance to drive 'a car?' Thanks eaglescout