I answer your auto insurance questions?

[Skell18]

Lol yes hit and run is always an option and up until about 2002 it was usually a pretty successful option. Unfortunately for people that take that route there are camera just about everywhere in every city as well as tens to hundreds of people with cell phones capable of taking pretty clear pictures of license plates even if theyre speeding away. And if you have a hit and run on any reports i pull up I can guarantee that will be a denial of coverage unless I instead surcharge you for roughly 180% of your premium.

That is illegal here! If you do that you get a visit from plod and a trip to extremes Mexican jail! No flesh lights included

[GN Tobacco Sweden AB]

Can you answer on insurance quastion for Sweden ?

[Premium Parrots]

I just woke up to find these responses. Well, I will just say that when my first kid got her license I called my agent to let them know she would be driving. The agent only asked if the car was registered in her name. I told her no but I just bought her a car and its registered in my name. My agent told me "then shes an occasional driver on your autos right"? I said well yes, kind of. The agent said there is no need add my kid to the list of drivers. Shes an occasional driver just like anyone else would be if I loaned my car to them. I asked if that was true and I was told yes, that the agent did the same thing herself. I also called another agent and was told the same thing and that its just a way for the insurance cos to get more $ from you. All 3 of my kids had accidents when they first started driving and there was never any question about coverage or the insurance cost going up. However, if a car/tags are registered in the kids name then they have to buy their own insurance.
My agent did it this way with her 3 boys, as well as her customers including myself. Bottom line is that was recommended by two insurance agents. So thats what I did.

I know people that still follow that rule, have an accident, and theres never any problem. I did it before and would not hesitate to do it again...if I had kids that young.

so now you can see why I commented
"btw, thunder, your answer is very good and makes sense. Great job they taught you well. However, my answer holds true also....and is alot cheaper."

An insurance agent that is WORKING FOR YOU should be trying to save you money. But sadly most agents are there to make the insurance co more $ and thats what you've been taught.

I would never tell em thats for sure.

[Thunder_Snus]

That is illegal here! If you do that you get a visit from plod and a trip to extremes Mexican jail! No flesh lights included

What is illegal?

[Thunder_Snus]

Can you answer on insurance quastion for Sweden ?

More than likely no. Insurance rules and laws vary from state to state and they vary a ton from country to country.
If its more basic i could probably use some logic on my end to give you the PROBABLE answer.

[Thunder_Snus]

I just woke up to find these responses. Well, I will just say that when my first kid got her license I called my agent to let them know she would be driving. The agent only asked if the car was registered in her name. I told her no but I just bought her a car and its registered in my name. My agent told me "then shes an occasional driver on your autos right"? I said well yes, kind of. The agent said there is no need add my kid to the list of drivers. Shes an occasional driver just like anyone else would be if I loaned my car to them. I asked if that was true and I was told yes, that the agent did the same thing herself. I also called another agent and was told the same thing and that its just a way for the insurance cos to get more $ from you. All 3 of my kids had accidents when they first started driving and there was never any question about coverage or the insurance cost going up. However, if a car/tags are registered in the kids name then they have to buy their own insurance.
My agent did it this way with her 3 boys, as well as her customers including myself. Bottom line is that was recommended by two insurance agents. So thats what I did.

I know people that still follow that rule, have an accident, and theres never any problem. I did it before and would not hesitate to do it again...if I had kids that young.

so now you can see why I commented
"btw, thunder, your answer is very good and makes sense. Great job they taught you well. However, my answer holds true also....and is alot cheaper."

An insurance agent that is WORKING FOR YOU should be trying to save you money. But sadly most agents are there to make the insurance co more $ and thats what you've been taught.

I would never tell em thats for sure.

Well I'm not an insurance agent. Not to get too into details to give away where i work or what i do but usually its agents bending the rules because their commision is based off of a policy not on the ammount they actually charge. Typically it is the agent that is bending rules and not adding drivers that should be added to save you money so they stay. Both sides of thinking are completely understandable. If i'm getting commision off of you every time you renew im going to do what i can to make sure you like the price...unfortunately that CAN lead to problems if the claim or the situation falls into the hands of someone on the back end of things that is payed to make sure things are right and not just as cheap as possible without being caught. Perhaps your insurance does things a little differently but your children driving that car give it more risk (as you stated they all had accidents) Those higher risks should have been accounted for and charged accordingly. So yes in a sense you did nothing wrong since you informed you agent and they told you that you were protected. If your child had an accident and it turns out they arent on your policy and you informed your insurance of this you are in no trouble. You told them and they chose to charge nothing. That's not to say your agent may be in some trouble for not equating that extra risk that was exposed to your vehicles by your children.

[Thunder_Snus]

And just to add further to that PP yes you did nothing wrong, and if thats what they did for you dont question them, thats what they said and you said ok. It sounds like you didnt know what would happen so you called your insurance and they told you that basically nothing would happen. Perhaps your insurance does things a bit different but you have to realize that extra exposure should have been accounted for otherwise everyone that has a child will be paying for what their own risk is and not what the childs risk brings to the table despite that risk being there. Insurance charges you what they think they will lose paying claims for you plus something else to be profitable. If PP is bringing 100$ worth of risk to the table each month They might charge you 105$. But with your children driving your car theyre potentially upping that to bringing 200$ worth of risk each month and if that hasnt been equated that insurance will fail QUICKLY.

[Premium Parrots]

Well I'm not an insurance agent. Not to get too into details to give away where i work or what i do but usually its agents bending the rules because their commision is based off of a policy not on the ammount they actually charge. Typically it is the agent that is bending rules and not adding drivers that should be added to save you money so they stay. Both sides of thinking are completely understandable. If i'm getting commision off of you every time you renew im going to do what i can to make sure you like the price...unfortunately that CAN lead to problems if the claim or the situation falls into the hands of someone on the back end of things that is payed to make sure things are right and not just as cheap as possible without being caught. Perhaps your insurance does things a little differently but your children driving that car give it more risk (as you stated they all had accidents) Those higher risks should have been accounted for and charged accordingly. So yes in a sense you did nothing wrong since you informed you agent and they told you that you were protected. If your child had an accident and it turns out they arent on your policy and you informed your insurance of this you are in no trouble. You told them and they chose to charge nothing. That's not to say your agent may be in some trouble for not equating that extra risk that was exposed to your vehicles by your children.

Just like I said.....they taught you well. Get the money.


Still they are occastional drivers of autos owned and registered to you. Same as loaning the car to your neighbor. If you pay for that coverage then well.....your ass is still covered. No worries.

[Thunder_Snus]

Just like I said.....they taught you well. Get the money.


Still they are occastional drivers of autos owned and registered to you. Same as loaning the car to your neighbor. If you pay for that coverage then well.....your ass is still covered. No worries.

My job involves no incentive for getting more money, or dealing with customers in any way so I have no stake in that part. I believe we're using 2 different versions of the term "occasional." Now if your child was taking that car to the airport to pick up grandma who flys in every 2 months. Then no She more than likely doesnt need to be rated. If you are taking that car 20 miles to work every day coming back and then she takes it 2 miles to work every day then she would be the insurance definition of occasional.

Example. My parents and I visit eachother every christmas weather it be where i live or where they live. If one of us is driving the others car for that week they dont need to be rated. However lets say I lived with my parents and drove their car maybe to school, or i picked up an imaginary little sister from school or used it regularly. If it gets to the point that I am using that car quite regularly then I SHOULD be rated accordingly. Now the definition may vary insurance to insurance agent to agent state to state. Maybe me driving that car to school every friday will be rated by one person and not the other. Taking that car to school 3 times a week will probably cause me to be rated by anyone. Theres a grey area inbetween definitely.

[Premium Parrots]

My job involves no incentive for getting more money, or dealing with customers in any way so I have no stake in that part. I believe we're using 2 different versions of the term "occasional." Now if your child was taking that car to the airport to pick up grandma who flys in every 2 months. Then no She more than likely doesnt need to be rated. If you are taking that car 20 miles to work every day coming back and then she takes it 2 miles to work every day then she would be the insurance definition of occasional.

Example. My parents and I visit eachother every christmas weather it be where i live or where they live. If one of us is driving the others car for that week they dont need to be rated. However lets say I lived with my parents and drove their car maybe to school, or i picked up an imaginary little sister from school or used it regularly. If it gets to the point that I am using that car quite regularly then I SHOULD be rated accordingly. Now the definition may vary insurance to insurance agent to agent state to state. Maybe me driving that car to school every friday will be rated by one person and not the other. Taking that car to school 3 times a week will probably cause me to be rated by anyone. Theres a grey area inbetween definitely.

We pay for insurance to cover the autos/owners of the cars we own. Anyone else is an occasional driver and we pay for that too. You don't have to tell the insurance co everytime someone else drives it.

Say you have one car for 3 kids....you really expect the customer to pay xtra for each kid? We buy Auto insurance to cover the car. But they want to determine the rate by who drives them.

[Skell18]

What is illegal?

Hit and run, if you have an accident you are required by law to stop at the scene.

[Thunder_Snus]

Hit and run, if you have an accident you are required by law to stop at the scene.

Lol yes it is here as well. However as im sure you know not everyone does that. I was saying that it was easier to get away with before everything had a camera on it.

[Thunder_Snus]

We pay for insurance to cover the autos/owners of the cars we own. Anyone else is an occasional driver and we pay for that too. You don't have to tell the insurance co everytime someone else drives it.

Say you have one car for 3 kids....you really expect the customer to pay xtra for each kid? We buy Auto insurance to cover the car. But they want to determine the rate by who drives them.

You're exactly right as i also said above. You dont have to inform your auto insurer that your friend is taking your car to the store. But if your friend starts to drive the car more than just on rare occasions then they should be accounted for. And yes all 3 children would be rated but on the same car. Auto insurers are aware that if you have 1 car for three kids that they can't all get into an accident at the same time. What i was getting at though is that each would be accounted for for the expected amount they would drive the car. If all 3 kids share a car equally they would all be rated at 33% of what it would cost you to insure the car with just them. I've completely agreed and confirmed everything you've said PP but for some reason I feel our language is getting misinterpreted by eachother.


Everyone that is rated is not being rated as a 100% driver of the car if they are not. They are being equated for their risk relative to their exposure to the car.

[Premium Parrots]

Oh I agree. You are the professional telling us the insurance companys wishes. We appreciate that you are offering info because alot of people just don't understand. But the fact remains the same although theres lots of grey area involved in this issue. The insurance companys allow for this.....and we pay for it. Why pay more? The car belongs to the parents all others will be occasional drivers no matter how much they drive it.

[Thunder_Snus]

Oh I agree. You are the professional telling us the insurance companys wishes. We appreciate that you are offering info because alot of people just don't understand. But the fact remains the same although theres lots of grey area involved in this issue. The insurance companys allow for this.....and we pay for it. Why pay more? The car belongs to the parents all others will be occasional drivers no matter how much they drive it.

True which is why your children would be rated for roughly 1/5 of what they would be on their own. However, if someone wanted you to fix anything that goes wrong with their apartment for a year and asked you what you would want in return would you just throw out a price of would you check out the place first? Are the wires faulty? Are the pipes ok? Does this person have guests over? Are there parties? Sprinklers? How long would it take a fire department to respond? It goes the same with insurance. If PP has been driving 80 years with no tickets or accidents insurance will see him as a very low risk and charge him accordingly, but once Cousin Jeff moves in and starts driving the car is the same risk still there? Would we want to charge more if Jeff has an accident every 6 months? Trust me insurance has a lot of laws and regulations to follow, not everything is trying to get more money out of you, its simply adjusting the risk associated with the car. Sure it's still PPs car and PP drives it but now cousin Jeff drives it as well and his risk needs to be equated to the ammount of money paid to protect that car.


If no action needed to be taken for your children then either
A. The agent wasnt following rules and protocol (not unlikely and it didnt cost you anything so thats really good) or
B. You're already being charged for a risk that used to not be present. In essence your paying more because other people have bad driving records and to keep prices low they equate your risk with theirs so instead of clean driving PP paying 200/6mo and Dirty Dan with 8 accident paying 500/6mo the price will meet somewhere in the middle. Thats great for the bad driver but its not rewarding the good driver for his low risk. If your premium is being adjusted because you have children driving now thats good. It means you werent being charged for that before. You were being charged for your sole risk associated with that vehicle instead of an average of you and 100 other peoples risks to 100 cars. More than likely tho your agent just didnt follow protocol, which is by no means bad for you because you keep the same price.