Insuring a new driver with divorced parents

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

Son has the right to tell Mom to kiss off until such time as parents issue licenses and not the state. You might want to remember that a driver's license is issued to those considered to have met the STATE'S requirements to possess one, not YOURS.

When a MINOR child wants THIS mom to sign off on that driver's license, you better show that you are responsible. I can guarantee that I did NOT sign for one if there was a grade lower than a C on a report card. If I am going to pay more for insurance, you have to show that you are responsible.

They were more than welcome, at 18, to get a license and pay full freight for all the associated expenses. While under MY roof and I am funding all this stuff, it's by MY rules.

In this case, mom is setting up rules but dad is undermining her.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

This was also an issue:
Dad provided HIS address which is NOT the child's legal residence.

 

[davew128]

When a MINOR child wants THIS mom to sign off on that driver's license, you better show that you are responsible. I can guarantee that I did NOT sign for one if there was a grade lower than a C on a report card. If I am going to pay more for insurance, you have to show that you are responsible.

And the reason they don't pay for their own insurance on their own car when they get it is? If they don't get their own car, then feel free to not let them drive YOURS.

In this case, mom is setting up rules but dad is undermining her.

Show me where in the law it states a non-custodial parent cannot sign off on the child getting a license.

 

[davew128]

This was also an issue:
Dad provided HIS address which is NOT the child's legal residence.

Which is a separate and distinct problem.

 

[ecmst12]

All licensed drivers in the household need to be listed on the insurance policy. Mom will need to pay for insurance for him whether he's allowed to drive the car or not or able to pay her back for it or not, once he has a license. Since mom was able to get the license rescinded by the state, obviously the state respects her ability to decide.

 

[davew128]

All licensed drivers in the household need to be listed on the insurance policy. Mom will need to pay for insurance for him whether he's allowed to drive the car or not or able to pay her back for it or not, once he has a license.

Since WHEN? Only regular drivers of a vehicle ever need to be listed on a policy.

Since mom was able to get the license rescinded by the state, obviously the state respects her ability to decide.

And as she notes, father could get it reinstated just as quickly.

 

[Zigner]

And as she notes, father could get it reinstated just as quickly.

Which brings us back to this: Kiddo=Pawn

Mom has no problem with kiddo getting his license - just not if it's dad that signs off on it.

 

[kaizen]

Reread, Zigner.

I do have a problem(s) with son getting his license. They are:

-He has not passed the drug test.

-His correct, primary residential address must be used.

-He must be insured through my policy.


After that, I don't care who signs off on it.

 

[Zigner]

Reread, Zigner.

I do have a problem(s) with son getting his license. They are:

-He has not passed the drug test.

This is the first time you've mentioned a drug test.

-His correct, primary residential address must be used.

Submit a change of address

-He must be insured through my policy.

Ridiculous. He is INSURED. Pay half of it and be done with it. If you want additional insurance, it's on you. If you don't want to let him drive while he's in your care, that's your choice. THIS is the point that makes me think this is more about you having the power and using kiddo as a pawn to prove it.

After that, I don't care who signs off on it.

...so long as it's you.

 

[kaizen]

Reread, Zigner. Slower this time perhaps.

First sentence in post #28 clearly states the drug test being a condition of getting the license.

Submit a change of address? Back to that fraud issue which I do not condone. Son's legal address is mine.

I will pay half of it anytime. (I think that is in post #7). Reread slower, Zigner.

 

[Zigner]

From Post #7:

They have two choices. Take it or leave it. My insurance, our address. I'll pay 50% and they can each pay 25% or there will be no license.

Is the intent to have YOU control the insurance? Sure sounds like it. Also, the address can be changed very easily.

First sentence in post #28 clearly states the drug test being a condition of getting the license.

Yep, missed that. So give kiddo the drug test and be done with it already.

Submit a change of address? Back to that fraud issue which I do not condone. Son's legal address is mine.

Right, so fix it - easy-peasy.

I will pay half of it anytime. (I think that is in post #7). Reread slower, Zigner.

I already addressed that - you will pay 50% if it's YOUR insurance. Control control control

 

[ecmst12]

Dave, read your policy or ask your agent. All licensed drivers in your household need to be either listed or excluded, and excluded is NOT recommended for reasons I already described.

 

[davew128]

Dave, read your policy or ask your agent. All licensed drivers in your household need to be either listed or excluded, and excluded is NOT recommended for reasons I already described.

I DID read it. It says nothing of the sort. The carrier's FAQ states that anyone in the household who has access to the vehicle SHOULD be listed or otherwise excluded. It is by no means required.

That said, I have someone in the household who has a suspended license listed on my policy, and no that person does not drive the car.

 

[ecmst12]

And if that person DOES drive your car for some reason, they'll be covered even if the license is still suspended. It protects you. Not listing or excluding all drivers in the household (and everyone in the household has access to the car, realistically speaking) is a really good way to get dropped by your insurance if an unlisted driver is in an accident, and they will probably end up back-charging you the premium that you should have been paying all along anyway, because they will probably have to cover the accident. It's a mess and you shouldn't do it.

 

[LdiJ]

And if that person DOES drive your car for some reason, they'll be covered even if the license is still suspended. It protects you. Not listing or excluding all drivers in the household (and everyone in the household has access to the car, realistically speaking) is a really good way to get dropped by your insurance if an unlisted driver is in an accident, and they will probably end up back-charging you the premium that you should have been paying all along anyway, because they will probably have to cover the accident. It's a mess and you shouldn't do it.

That is really state specific. In my state, for example, the only people who need to be listed are primary drivers of a car and minors. An occasional driver does not have to be listed. However, in my state, insurance goes with the car rather than the driver unless you opt for specific coverage that covers you for any car you drive. In other words, you can have a license without owning or insuring a car, but you cannot have a car without insuring it.

So, if I lend my car to my next door neighbor in an emergency, and he has a wreck, its not him that has to be covered, its me.