I can confirm this for you, as I was previously a licensed insurance agent. This is true universally across America. Unless you specifically request it there are generally no excluded drivers on your policy. All drivers except yourself will be considered permissive. Generally people only use this feature when their kids turn 16 so they don’t suddenly pay 2k extra every month. (Not an exaggeration) or if they have unlicensed adults in the house that the insurance company knows about. If you have any excluded drivers you can look at your policy and find them listed alongside normal drivers, but they will be specifically marked as excluded.
I can confirm this for you, as I was previously a licensed insurance agent. This is true universally across America. Unless you specifically request it there are generally no excluded drivers on your policy. All drivers except yourself will be considered permissive. Generally people only use this feature when their kids turn 16 so they don’t suddenly pay 2k extra every month. (Not an exaggeration) or if they have unlicensed adults in the house that the insurance company knows about. If you have any excluded drivers you can look at your policy and find them listed alongside normal drivers, but they will be specifically marked as excluded.
And yet, the insurance companies demand to know the primary driver of each vehicle and raise rates based on the driver's record. You can even get a discount if the driver takes a safe driving class (reduce points, etc.). Insurance is a scam.
Then you're very foolish. All it will take is one tiny prang with a BMW and your financial future will be ruined. At a minimum, every car on the road should have third-party insurance (to cover the other car if you're at fault), even if you don't care about your own.
@@natk1105 Tis a joke, sir. It’s not legal to have a car uninsured where I live. So yeah, I also evade taxes, do crack cocaine and smoke in public places.
Years ago, back in college, in California,I had an intoxicated friend who needed me to drive his truck and we got in an accident on the freeway. The cops showed up and determined it was a no fault accident. My friend would make me feel guilty about wrecking his truck, though it wasn't my fault, I would buy him all his drinks when we went out, dinner for him and his girlfriend along with fast food everday for a month straight. I probably spent well over $1000 during thst time. So, a couple of months later I got a letter from his mom, since he was on her insurance, saying she was going to sue me for the damages of the wreck, for both vehicles. Even though the insurance had paid out for the accident she wanted me to pay her back for all of it. I told her it wasn't going to happen, and unfortunately, I'd see her in court. Luckily, I never heard from her again about it nor did I talk to that friend after that.
Depending on your insurance provider, ANYONE who drives the car is insured. My sister-in-law crashed my car a couple of years ago, and Geico covered it, no questions asked.
I was quoted an extra $300 per month for car insurance because my girlfriend's 14 year old daughter lived with us. They wouldn't sell me insurance otherwise, because she "might" decide to drive my car. I went with a different company.
For a driver living in your house to be excluded from your auto insurance policy, you (the policyholder) have to sign a from acknowledging that the driver is excluded. This is typically done to keep the premiums from being higher. Young drivers are at a higher risk of being in a car crash and your premium goes up as a result.
my sister got off my parent’s insurance as she was going to switch to her own, but she didn’t have a car at the time so she wasn’t quick to it. my insurance automatically put her on my policy which raised my rates. it’s beyond me why they were able to do that without any form of consent by me. just purely the fact that she was deemed an eligible driver and had the same address as me. furthermore, they wouldn’t remove her unless i sent proof she was with a different insurer! who knew she had to have car insurance for her non-existent car for them to accept that she wasn’t driving mine
Which should be illegal for descrimination reasons. It's basically legally equivalent of saying we should charge all Asian people more for car insurance.
'Permisive use' only covers limited driving. If someone drives your car regularly, you need to add them to your policy or they need to have their own insurance.
That's kinda fucked up. Anyone can drive my car and be covered. Slightly higher deductible if the driver is below a certain age and is not the insurance holder though.
What the insurance company doesn't know is that you can totally let someone drive regularly... if they crash your car you just say they borrowed it for the first time. How are they gonna know the difference? Regardless… I think it's pretty insane to let anybody else drive your car regularly… I'd hesitate to let anybody drive my car even once
@@andrewlindenfeld6222 I understand but all it takes is one wrong statement and BOOM, you are screwed. Best to be safe. My brother added me to his policy and his monthly payment went DOWN. Wouldn't hurt to check.
@@andrewlindenfeld6222 keep in mind some insurance companies are doing discounts on driving by tracking you. I refused to sign up for it on my insurance because in order for it to work, you have to allow the app to track your phones location at all times. And there are also some pretty clear examples of when they will know if you should have someone on your policy, like married couples.
I didn't get my license until I was 23 and because I got a ticket prior to getting my license for no license and no insurance I had to have insurance in order to get my license and I didn't own a vehicle.
Weirdly as a canadian its the exact opposite and its the person not the car whos covered but you are only covered on vehicles you have part or full ownership of
Have you checked your policy, or just had a rep lie, I mean claim you're covered on a phone call you don't have a recording of? Not saying you're wrong, but they are 100% that scummy.
What company? I've been looking for this, but every company I've found offering it, will only sell it if someone doesn't own the vehicles in order to get traditional insurance on each one.
In the UK, the person is insured as well as the car. The person may be able to drive _any_ car, provided he has the owner's permission (and not cheapo insurance) but the car is covered for being stolen even when no-one is driving it.
Actually most insurance now does not allow you to drive any car. Although it used to be the norm, very few policies permit you to drive any car on the owners say so anymore - you should check your insurance carefully to make sure yours still allows it if you use this regularly
@@daleykunit's even more complicated than that, a lot of policies I've seen recently do allow you to drive another vehicle with the owners person in an emergency (asked my broker what emergency means and it includes things like getting home after the main driver badly sprains an ankle and can't drive) it's just getting way too complicated.
As I'm new to the road in the UK and only have my CBT My insurance doesn't allow me to ride over moterbikes And I believe for people to ride my bike they need to be added on to my insurance So my dad can ride my bike but my brother can't But plz correct me if I'm wrong as this is my first insurance contract
@@daleykun My insurance does allow me to drive other cars with the owner's permission. It says so on the certificate. The only exception is I'm not allowed to recover a car that is not mine from the police pound! That's to make the owner buy insurance.
"Some scummy insurance companies" implies that there are insurance companies that aren't scummy. They are. They all are. It's the most prevalent legal scam there is. At least in the UK.
I live in the US and I have specifically had at least four different insurance companies tell me if somebody is going to be covered to drive my car they have to be listed on the policy. That's why USAA sells a non-owned vehicle insurance so that you are covered on any vehicle that you don't physically own. It is also weird because there's this notion that you can't insure a car that you don't own but I have done that before too.
Typically people who have regular access to your vehicles need to be added to the policy to be covered. People who are just borrowing your car once or twice don’t need to be added. Non owners policies are for people who don’t own a car but maybe regularly drive non owned cars, like rental cars. Insurances companies won’t usually add cars to your policy that you or a driver on your policy don’t own. But there are exceptions to every rule.
Fun fact: If you sell your car and you don't make sure the new owner titles the car in their name and they get in an accident your insurance may have to pay because the transaction was incomplete.
Depends on the insurance company. In alot of states, the standard ISO policy includes protections for insured drivers on a policy and permissive users. Multiple insurance policies can actually be in play when permissive use is involved. The primary is almost always the insured vehicle, but the permissive users might come up if the primary vehicle doesn't have enough coverage.
So why did someone with a suspended license living with me raise my rate? According to the insurance company they 'might' try to drive my car. So my rate doubled overnight. My car didn't change, just who was near my keys.
Good point, not really sure. I think insurance from rental cars typically come from your personal credit card as an added feature. Not sure if my insurance actually covers rental cars
Typically your insurance will follow you to driver other cars that you don’t have regular access to, like rental cars. Your insurance is secondary to any insurance the vehicle may have in that case.
@@BKIslandersfanit's not simply untrue, but mostly. There are companies and agents who do this, and have been caught doing so. Overall they do a cost analysis and often low ball their offer based on many factors. Work is often put out to the lowest bidder or who can meet the insurances numbers These are the "approved vendors" for most insurance. Those they work with often only meet their numbers by cutting corners, or subcontracting those that do. In reality the company, and everyone else, has to make money. Paying salaries, buildings, rent etc. At each step and interaction someone is extracting value or money, this is a simple fact. This value is lost by the insurance holders, transfered the insurance, and others in the chain.
Lol we are literally taught to try to FIND coverage for people when all else fails. The entire process of denying coverage is so arduous and regulated that I'd rather just pay your claim than deal with writing up a reservation of rights in the first place.
Does this apply if your car is stolen? Like, say some clown steals your car, goes for a joyride with his friends, and then launches it into the woods. Is that covered?
@@semi.g Yup. And that "Depends" usually comes down to "I wrote it myself! On the PHONE! And SAVED 4000 a year!". Then the accident comes and you have liability only, state minimum, no tow, no rental.
Seeing as that person wouldn’t be “permitted” to drive the car, I would think that the insurance didn’t apply and you would have to sue to recover damages. If you don’t know who caused the damage, either you’d better hope your insurance company takes mercy on you or you have additional coverage for a situation like that.
They can with conditions, like they can exclude drivers under the age of 25 or over the age of 75. Named individuals are more rare, usually involving past incidents between the excluded driver, your insurance, and yourself - like if you give permission to Dave to drive, and Dave crashes the car almost everytime you let Dave drive, your insurance might eventually say that they won't insure any more damages because Dave was driving.
Well, not exactly. For instance, if I drive another person's car, my insurance carries with me so long as I am not driving that car for more than 30 calendar days per year. In most policies, both the owner of the policy and the driver of the car are covered. It's just that the insurance that carries the vehicle information is typically primary.
In the US if you test drive a vehicle from the dealer and wreck it then it will be you and your insurance that is liable to the dealership car and whoever you hit if your fault. So be careful with just minimum coverage, you may be paying for multiple sets of damages.
Interestingly, Russian policy is the reverse: you have to be explicitly listed in the papers to be eligible. (There are exceptions, but they are much more expensive.)
The insurance company won't allow a permissive driver to be someone who lives at your home, at least in some jurisdictions. If your roommate crashes your car and they aren't named insured or an additional driver, you might be denied a claim. It's definitely worth looking into.
Age (too old or too young), driving history (DUI history, license revocation, no license), health (seizures, sedating medication, certain mental health disorders). Essentially, anything that reasonably increases the risk something bad is going to happen. Some people on your excluded list become non-excluded in the event of a qualified emergency, but usually that being young people or people whose conditions are well-controlled
When I was in college, I was not a driver for 80% of the year and taking me off the policy lowered the premium but that made me a non permissive driver.
I can give you an answer to this. If someone lives with you or is named in the registration/contract you ONLY HAVE TWO OPTIONS: 1) Included, meaning you provide that person’s driver license information and specifically add them as a driver. They will be rated as a driver and your price will fluctuate depending on their age, experience, and driving history. (tickets & accidents count) 2) Excluded, although this person lives in the home or is named in the registration/contract they are specifically excluded. This means they could drive the car, but the insurance policy specifically will not cover any claims if there is an incident and this person was the one driving in that moment.
So if I have classic insurance and I drive my car 95% if the time - and one night I don’t feel so comfortable to drive so I let my sober friend drive, then I’m ok? My parents always taught me that this was wrong and to NEVER let anyone who is not explicitly on your policy operate your car
Under 99% of insurance permissive drivers are allowed and covered. The advice isn't terrible becuase you are trusting your vehicle and potential insurance claim to someone else, but that's no reason to not let a sober friend drive you home (as long as they have a license and are trustworthy)
I have Mercury Insurance and they exclude any driver that lives with you. If you want that person to be able to drive your car, you have to add them to your policy. Mercury's reasoning is that they can't be a permissive driver because they theoretically have regular access to your car. It's a little annoying, but it keeps abuse down and the rates from going up as fast. I've had them for almost 20 years in multiple incidents (a couple that were my fault) and they're a little tough, but mostly fair and they've covered me well.
how the fuck does a legal driver that lives with you and is allowed to drive your car via your permission have anything to do with "abuse" of the system?
@@1369Stileswhat they mean by abuse is having a driver in your house who drivers yours cars but you don’t add them to the policy so you don’t have to pay for them. It’s common with teenage drivers because they’re so much more expensive some people will try to avoid paying for them by just not adding them to the policy. Without an exclusion in place, they would be covered without the customer having to pay for it.
@@Darruus why is the default for that teenagers. you could have a friend living with you; you could have a brother, or cousin, or other relative with you. there is a reason that i mentioned "legal" driver......if any "legal" driver is considered a permissive driver, then NOT adding that person to the policy is by definition not abusing the system. i get the teenager thing.....but as soon as they turn 18, that exclusion should be null and void. (assuming they are fully licensed to drive)
@@1369Stiles Because being a "legal" driver is only part of the story. Even though the insurance follows the car, not all drivers are considered equal risk and that's why not all drivers will be given the same monthly premium for the exact same car in the same zip code. Maybe you're a decent driver, but you decide to let your cousin who lives with you (who is without a car because they totaled theirs...again) drive your extra car every day to work. Under the "permissive" driver loophole that crappy driver isn't paying into the system that they are then most likely going to take money out of. The idea of the "permissive" driver was to allow one-off situations. Not for your terrible driver of a cousin to have regular access to a car and a payment system they don't contribute to. That, unfortunately, affects everyone. You also have to be careful who you let drive your car on your policy. If they seriously injur or kill someone, especially recklessly, YOU can be sued in civil court by the injured party (or their estate) for allowing a demonstrated menace to have your keys. You don't want to put yourself in that situation.
@@WarmestComputer "isnt paying into the system".......thats what its all about for you and for the insurance company, isnt it. so never mind that the insurance system is a scam in the first place (im not saying we dont need insurance, just that its a corrupt business model); never mind that you could pay "into the system" for a decade with no claims, but then as soon as you do have a claim, they will either drop you as a customer, or raise your rates. all that aside, its not abuse or fraud to allow someone to use your car without putting them on your policy. your entire rant was based on the worst possible scenario, rather than the majority of what average joes experience is.......which is that most driving experiences are mundane, and uneventful. also.....if i own a car, and i let someone use my car on a regular basis for, lets say 10 yrs, and not a single accident happens, yet i get into 5 accidents in those ten years......as the person on the insurance policy, how is me not having the other person on my insurance abuse or fraud, when im the one costing the insurance company a shit ton of money. oh, thats right.....if the other person had been on the insurance, my premiums would have been higher, and the insurance company would not have lost so much money on my accidents. capitalism.....you gotta love it. anything else you want to defend the multibillion dollar industry about?
Depends on state. I had to get commercial insurance to allow others to drive my truck. If they regularly drive, I have to name them on the insurance. Personal insurance in my state coves you no matter what car you're operating (as long as you have permission) check with your insurance company/policy on this one.
@@adamcouch1540Virginia has the most unlicensed drivers in the US because everybody has a suspended one. High time to inspect the laws regarding that, methinks.
@@doomsdayrabbit4398 They did and it’s going to get worse July 1st. They removed the uninsured motorist exception. Meaning any vehicle with active and tags and no insurance is going to have a suspended license. It’s estimated 10,000 more suspensions July 1st
In some states full exclusion is not permitted, so instead the insuramce company charges you an extra arm & leg if there is a young person in the house that would otherwise be excluded, as if they were a regular driver of your car.
i could understand both sides of this. People might not fully understand the excluded driver part, and they are effectively an uninsured motorist then. On the flipside it sucks to pay extra because you have a 16 year old kid who would not be driving that car
used to have St. Farm, my son was dropped by SF. Since he did not have his own car, I had to change Insurance companies. SF used to cover me when renting a vehicle. New company does not do that. Never realized it was the car, and not me covered. Thanks for the information
Generally you should not need to add them to your policy because of permissive driver benefits. Read your policy and make sure there are no specific exclusions to this. It can increase your policy rates naming household members, and that only benefits the insurance company.
@@battleskill23 generally you should be sure when reading your policy and call to be sure. Your spouse and children may need to be excluded or named or added as additional drivers. Your roommate may need to be listed as an additional driver if they ever do it. Some policies will not let people who live with you be permissive drivers.
Read your policy. Typically you must notify the company of any person of driving age in the household. If you have a child that becomes old enough to drive and you don't tell them they can cancel you or deny a claim if they find out about the child.
That’s how insurance can work (how mine does). It also makes perfect sense. Should someone that’s an absolute horrible driver pay the same rates as someone with a clean record? And if it were solely applied to and dependent on the car, what’s to stop someone with a clean record from getting cheap insurance for someone with multiple previous DWIs? I have an impeccable driving record and pay less than $50 a month on my truck. My brother has multiple accidents, a prior suspended license, and the same model/year truck and pays $150+ a month for the same coverage. Should he be covered under my policy? Should I be able to insure his truck so he pays less?
Really depends on your insurance though. Where I live the standard insurance is only for you and your partner. You can pay for your kids to be added later though, and there are insurances that let anyone over a certain age drive.
This is incorrect in Michigan, your car insurance follows you around for the purposes of PIP. If a car slams into you as a pedestrian, you’re filing a claim on your own insurance.
Depends on what kind of car insurance you have I do believe. Because you can get insurance on your driver's license so technically that would be the insured person and not the car
I went to college to be an engineer on ships. The jobs were few and far between at that time. I stayed at my parents for a bit, doing odd jobs to pay the bills, while I was applying for those shipping jobs. I had to specifically exclude my Lil' Bro from my vehicle's insurance policy. Mom and Dad had him on their policies. I explained to him that if he ever tried to drive my vehicle, I would report it stolen. I had to emphasize that the fact that he was a teenage male would have nearly tripled the cost of my policy the moment that I shared a household with him, unless I excluded him by name. The threat of jail got through to him. We never had an issue.😂
It depends on your policy. If you are a pedestrian and hit by someone who runs off, your uninsured motorists coverage covers your injuries. In your excluded operator example, the person who owns the cars policy won't cover but the drivers policy will, if they have one. The are also nonowners policies to help give coverage to people who don't own vehicles.
I learned this the hard way: My GF borrowed my car, wrecked it (her fault), and even though she had her own insurance, it was MY insurance that paid, and my rates subsequently went up. Remember kids, when you let someone borrow your car, you’re ALSO letting them borrow your insurance policy.
It depends on the state you reside in. Some states are insurance that follows the driver and other states are insurance that follow the vehicle. It is very important to read your policy for your insurance and ask questions. The policy is a binding contract between you and your insurance company that can help you or hurt you.
Should also be noted that if there is an excluded driver on a policy it is likely that driver cant stop hitting things with their car in the first place
@brett. No. I needed to stay with my parents for a bit after college graduation. My Lil' Bro was a teenage male. The moment that were were living under the same roof, he was considered a hazard to my insurance policy and the quotes were roughly three times the cost. By specifically excluding him by name, I was able to keep my policy cost the same.
That’s a very specific type of insurance. It’s primarily used for people who rent cars often. It’s also just a way insurance companies sell you a product you don’t really need.
@@evanshively1294I don't rent but drive multiple and my insurance follows be around unless I'm driving a company vehicle (because when I'm on their time their insurance supersedes mine)
There is no collision or comprehensive coverage, only liability. The insurance company didn’t try to sell me it, I had to ask for it. I drive others vehicles often and wanted to make sure that I have enough liability coverage while driving regardless of what they may have.
Another thing worth noting is a lot of policys basically have a thing where if someone is driving the car a certain amount they are supposed to be on the policy and if not they arent covered as a permissive driver, usually this is only a factor if its like your child who lives in your house because its hard to prove
This is mostly true. There are exceptions where your policy would follow you as the driver. Temporary replacement vehicles such as rentals or a loaner from a dealership. Your liability can follow you as well if you have a primary/excess situation. Where the policy on the car has a limits issue. Of course, some of this depends on your location and specific policy.
Just to add on to this, check with your insurance agent/company first. The coverage on the rental car is usually the same as the coverage on your own policy, so if you have liability only coverage, there might be coverage for anyone you hit, but not coverage for damage to the rental car you are driving. If you have multiple cars insured with multiple companies it might not be clear which insurance company should be covering the car which can get messy if there’s a claim.
There's a car rental company in Charlotte nc that makes you use your insurance if there's an accident. Based on what you said, our insurance wouldn't cover the rental car if we were driving?
There are further complexities past what he explained. For example, in most states, under most policies, if the insurance policy tied to a given car does not pay out (or if it does not exist), the driver’s primary policy will pay out, up to its maximums. As long as you had the car less than 30 days, and it was rented from a licensed and bonded rental company
You can get specific "borrowed vehicle" coverage. I had this for a while after highschool, because I'd be the sober driver and some of my friends didn't always keep insurance, and the company I worked for was grossly under insured.
There is an expectation that if others in the household use the car then they should be listed as drivers on the policy. The one off designated driver is one thing. There is too much additional risk when there is only 1 driver listed but unlisted others have regular access to the vehicle.
Happened to me. Hurt my left toe when I was in my car, went to the hospital and after I told them what had happened, they wanted my car insurance card, not my medical insurance.
As an adjuster, I will tell you, it depends. Each claim is adjusted based on the facts of loss, the policy coverages, and the laws and regulations of the location where the loss occurred. As for why the hospital wanted your car insurance vs your medical insurance: if the injury to your toe is determined to be covered under your car insurance, there are no pre-negotiated payment plans like there are going to be with your medical insurance. The hospital is looking at the potential of making more money.
@@KTibow looked into it a little and it seems that in most states, both you and Darren's rates would go up (if Darren has insurance, or tries to get insurance in the future). But unlike Darren, you may be able to (in some states) switch insurance companies and not have the accident impact your rates with that new company, as the accident would not be tied to your drivers license and wouldn't be on your personal driving record.
Have you considered moving out of that Godforsaken state? I've been there once and it was the worst place I have ever been. And it was a "nice" area too.
There is so many nuance to this is crazy, if insurance covers my car and not me, how come I had to settle with my insurance when I was in a not my fault accident in a company truck?
Can you do a video about the other side? To be more specific, what if I, sober Daren, get behind the wheel of someones car and get in an accident but that person whose car i am driving doesn’t have insurance? Or it’s not enough
Insurance is weird. Every insurance I've had was limited to person and vehicle, not just one, But you CAN insure yourself on any vehicle you drive and insure your car for anyone to drive
In that case the driver who stole your car would probably pay damages, and my guess is that depending on your plan a comprehensive coverage plan would cover the difference in the value of your car but not in damages the driver did to anything else
You'd face no liability so there's nothing to be covered there. Your property (the car) being covered depends on if you have comprehensive coverage or not.
@@OGimouse1 leaving your keys in your vehicle is entirely irrelevant and wouldn't invalidate a claim. And the car is only covered against theft if you carry comprehensive coverage.
weird. I have to say who can drive except me, and have to pay more (when they are young significantly more (like 70 % more), when they are older just like 20 € more. when I say everyone can drive my car, I have to pay like double the insurance.
I really like Mike Rafi, but FYI, I work in insurance, and it's a little more complicated. You might also lose some or all of your coverages if you have a driver in your house who should be on your policy, but is not on it, and then they get into an accident. I've seen this happen, for example, with parents who "forgot" to add their child to their policy after the child moves back in or gets their license. Permissive use generally applies to someone borrowing the car who is not a usual driver of the car. Anyway, read your insurance policy to be sure.
The is the way it works in the U.S. In the UK, it's the other way round. In the UK, every driver must be specifically named on the policy or they are not insured.
There is one state, South Carolina I think, that requires every licensed driver to carry a liability insurance policy even if they don't own a car. In that state drivers are insured. If the driver of the car isn't on the same policy as the owner of the car the driver's liability has to cover both the car they were driving and any other damage caused.
Beauty of teenager drivers. I learned this when my kids were coming up on driving age. Our insurance counted the kids as drivers at age 14 so we had to sign exclusionary form and send it back, and I'm visually disabled and ONLY have a state ID so our insurance has something called disabled medical exclusionary or non driver due to medical form and you tell them your medical condition and you sign that form too
@@jacobgeist6580 What? This is basic stuff. You aren't liable for damages caused by someone who stole your vehicle. Your property, the car, is absolutely covered if you have comprehensive coverage on the policy. If you don't carry comprehensive coverage (and most people do carry it), you'll be on your own for repairing your vehicle.
@austinfontenot8955 I never said you were liable for any other damage caused, but "comprehensive" coverage isn't even a thing, full coverage just means all the things you can be insured for and that varies from state to state and from provider to provider. Also, if you think that most people have full coverage you are hilariously out of touch. Most people (at least under the age of 35) have old ass cars minimum liability coverage. Most wealthy people have full coverage, but the rest of us can't afford it
@@jacobgeist6580 ...are you joking? It's literally called comprehensive coverage. It covers damages that aren't covered by your collision coverage. Things like glass damage, hitting an animal, falling objects, and theft. And yes, it's absolutely the norm to carry it since it's required by almost all lienholders. If your car is financed, there's a 99% chance you're carrying comprehensive coverage. This has nothing to do with the "well ackshually full coverage isn't real" that you brought up. Please stop talking out of your ass. ETA: I'd say about 80% of the auto policies I write carry comp and collision...
I'm insured just not by my car insurance and only after I kick the bucket. Got that dead peasant insurance bby! Treated like cattle by corporate america bby!
This is why it annoys me whenever relatives casually loan use of their vehicles, cause if they can't get coverage to repair/replace a vehicle or pay medical bills after a crash then they need to turn to the rest of the family to help them for their dumb mistake
I found it funny my dad's insurance covered him, my mom, and any other non-resident in the world. This meant i was the only person in the world not insured to drive his car.
I could be wrong, but I believe my state/policy has a rule in their policy where they require anyone old enough to drive within the same household (family or not, just anyone who could drive your car), be included on the policy. If they are not included or excluded specifically, they claim to have the right to deny a claim. I believe the thought is that this gets around the permissive use law, at least for lending your car to members in your household.
Members of the household need to be added due to the liability coverage. Also there are limits to allowing people to use your car. Anyone who causes an accident in the car the lawsuit goes to whoever is insuring the car. (Named insured/principal) you must legally add all household members to a policy
Rental cars are just like this. You are the one that signed for it so you are the only permissible driver. Anyone else drives is not covered and you will be responsible because you broke the contract
Your insurer uses a lot of factors to determine your rate. Who is driving the car and their driving history is a big one because it allows them to predict the likelihood of an accident.
Called progressive to ask if this is the case on my policy and they gave me the run around for 15 minutes
I can confirm this for you, as I was previously a licensed insurance agent. This is true universally across America. Unless you specifically request it there are generally no excluded drivers on your policy. All drivers except yourself will be considered permissive. Generally people only use this feature when their kids turn 16 so they don’t suddenly pay 2k extra every month. (Not an exaggeration) or if they have unlicensed adults in the house that the insurance company knows about. If you have any excluded drivers you can look at your policy and find them listed alongside normal drivers, but they will be specifically marked as excluded.
I can confirm this for you, as I was previously a licensed insurance agent. This is true universally across America. Unless you specifically request it there are generally no excluded drivers on your policy. All drivers except yourself will be considered permissive. Generally people only use this feature when their kids turn 16 so they don’t suddenly pay 2k extra every month. (Not an exaggeration) or if they have unlicensed adults in the house that the insurance company knows about. If you have any excluded drivers you can look at your policy and find them listed alongside normal drivers, but they will be specifically marked as excluded.
They lied about my statement and refused to go provide the audio recording. Switched as soon as I could
You need to get details you request IN WRITNG, it THEY refuse, get a new insurance company, and then request your refund.
And yet, the insurance companies demand to know the primary driver of each vehicle and raise rates based on the driver's record. You can even get a discount if the driver takes a safe driving class (reduce points, etc.). Insurance is a scam.
Nah, that’s where you’re wrong! My car isn’t insured either
I saved HUGE on my insurance rates with this EASY trick! (I do not have insurance)
Then you're very foolish. All it will take is one tiny prang with a BMW and your financial future will be ruined.
At a minimum, every car on the road should have third-party insurance (to cover the other car if you're at fault), even if you don't care about your own.
That’s where you’re wrong! I don’t have a car
@@natk1105 have no fear, for I am insured (but not for the bit!)
@@natk1105 Tis a joke, sir. It’s not legal to have a car uninsured where I live. So yeah, I also evade taxes, do crack cocaine and smoke in public places.
Years ago, back in college, in California,I had an intoxicated friend who needed me to drive his truck and we got in an accident on the freeway. The cops showed up and determined it was a no fault accident. My friend would make me feel guilty about wrecking his truck, though it wasn't my fault, I would buy him all his drinks when we went out, dinner for him and his girlfriend along with fast food everday for a month straight. I probably spent well over $1000 during thst time. So, a couple of months later I got a letter from his mom, since he was on her insurance, saying she was going to sue me for the damages of the wreck, for both vehicles. Even though the insurance had paid out for the accident she wanted me to pay her back for all of it. I told her it wasn't going to happen, and unfortunately, I'd see her in court. Luckily, I never heard from her again about it nor did I talk to that friend after that.
Man that sucks. Kinda shitty your friend let his mom's shitty choices get between you two too
he is not your friend and never was.
@@davidjacobs8558 I agree. Unfortunately, it took me a while to realize it.
How much more could the bro-code be violated?
Wow, I can see how far from the scam tree that apple fell.
It’s common to pay more so your kids can drive your car insured. So make sure you check your policy once your kids get their lisence
Depending on your insurance provider, ANYONE who drives the car is insured. My sister-in-law crashed my car a couple of years ago, and Geico covered it, no questions asked.
I was quoted an extra $300 per month for car insurance because my girlfriend's 14 year old daughter lived with us. They wouldn't sell me insurance otherwise, because she "might" decide to drive my car. I went with a different company.
It was 45 dollars extra for me to drive my dads second car as a primary but when I got my own car and insurance it was 350 a month
@@McNasty43"no questions asked" other than "what's your sister in laws name so we can ban her from geico?" 😂
@@McNasty43 might be a stupid question: but did your rate increase? Or were you able to clear fault?
For a driver living in your house to be excluded from your auto insurance policy, you (the policyholder) have to sign a from acknowledging that the driver is excluded. This is typically done to keep the premiums from being higher. Young drivers are at a higher risk of being in a car crash and your premium goes up as a result.
Exactly. Some say “I didn’t know I was excluded” but more often than not it’s voluntary and they had to sign..
@@Eclipse-lw4vfwrong, younger drivers are usually minors and their parents don't tell them.
my sister got off my parent’s insurance as she was going to switch to her own, but she didn’t have a car at the time so she wasn’t quick to it. my insurance automatically put her on my policy which raised my rates. it’s beyond me why they were able to do that without any form of consent by me. just purely the fact that she was deemed an eligible driver and had the same address as me.
furthermore, they wouldn’t remove her unless i sent proof she was with a different insurer! who knew she had to have car insurance for her non-existent car for them to accept that she wasn’t driving mine
Which should be illegal for descrimination reasons. It's basically legally equivalent of saying we should charge all Asian people more for car insurance.
Its the opposite in the uk every driver has to be listed on the insurance policy
'Permisive use' only covers limited driving. If someone drives your car regularly, you need to add them to your policy or they need to have their own insurance.
That's kinda fucked up. Anyone can drive my car and be covered. Slightly higher deductible if the driver is below a certain age and is not the insurance holder though.
What the insurance company doesn't know is that you can totally let someone drive regularly... if they crash your car you just say they borrowed it for the first time. How are they gonna know the difference? Regardless… I think it's pretty insane to let anybody else drive your car regularly… I'd hesitate to let anybody drive my car even once
@@andrewlindenfeld6222
I understand but all it takes is one wrong statement and BOOM, you are screwed. Best to be safe. My brother added me to his policy and his monthly payment went DOWN. Wouldn't hurt to check.
@@andrewlindenfeld6222 at least around here it's quite common for a household with 2 adults just having the one car.
@@andrewlindenfeld6222 keep in mind some insurance companies are doing discounts on driving by tracking you. I refused to sign up for it on my insurance because in order for it to work, you have to allow the app to track your phones location at all times.
And there are also some pretty clear examples of when they will know if you should have someone on your policy, like married couples.
I didn't get my license until I was 23 and because I got a ticket prior to getting my license for no license and no insurance I had to have insurance in order to get my license and I didn't own a vehicle.
Where did you get the car from then?
@@canalalex0119 if you are asking me the car I received the ticket in, it was my dad's.
Weirdly as a canadian its the exact opposite and its the person not the car whos covered but you are only covered on vehicles you have part or full ownership of
What Province? Because that is not how it works in Ontario.
Depends on the company. I've had full coverage with a company that covered me no matter what car I was driving.
The insurance on the car is primary. If you are driving someone else’s car, your own car insurance is secondary.
Mine covers me on any passenger vehicle I drive.
Have you checked your policy, or just had a rep lie, I mean claim you're covered on a phone call you don't have a recording of?
Not saying you're wrong, but they are 100% that scummy.
What company? I've been looking for this, but every company I've found offering it, will only sell it if someone doesn't own the vehicles in order to get traditional insurance on each one.
In the UK, the person is insured as well as the car. The person may be able to drive _any_ car, provided he has the owner's permission (and not cheapo insurance) but the car is covered for being stolen even when no-one is driving it.
Actually most insurance now does not allow you to drive any car. Although it used to be the norm, very few policies permit you to drive any car on the owners say so anymore - you should check your insurance carefully to make sure yours still allows it if you use this regularly
@@daleykunit's even more complicated than that, a lot of policies I've seen recently do allow you to drive another vehicle with the owners person in an emergency (asked my broker what emergency means and it includes things like getting home after the main driver badly sprains an ankle and can't drive) it's just getting way too complicated.
As I'm new to the road in the UK and only have my CBT
My insurance doesn't allow me to ride over moterbikes
And I believe for people to ride my bike they need to be added on to my insurance
So my dad can ride my bike but my brother can't
But plz correct me if I'm wrong as this is my first insurance contract
@@daleykun My insurance does allow me to drive other cars with the owner's permission. It says so on the certificate.
The only exception is I'm not allowed to recover a car that is not mine from the police pound! That's to make the owner buy insurance.
@@harleythomas701 I've no idea with bikes. It's probably all different.
Some scummy insurance companies don’t have permissive use clauses always read the contract!
"Some scummy insurance companies" implies that there are insurance companies that aren't scummy. They are. They all are. It's the most prevalent legal scam there is. At least in the UK.
@@MrSkinnyWhale it’s like this in the USA as well don’t worry. They are shafting everyone
In the uk the person is insured to drive one or more cars depending on the policy
I live in the US and I have specifically had at least four different insurance companies tell me if somebody is going to be covered to drive my car they have to be listed on the policy. That's why USAA sells a non-owned vehicle insurance so that you are covered on any vehicle that you don't physically own. It is also weird because there's this notion that you can't insure a car that you don't own but I have done that before too.
Typically people who have regular access to your vehicles need to be added to the policy to be covered. People who are just borrowing your car once or twice don’t need to be added.
Non owners policies are for people who don’t own a car but maybe regularly drive non owned cars, like rental cars.
Insurances companies won’t usually add cars to your policy that you or a driver on your policy don’t own. But there are exceptions to every rule.
To cover all the bases, you need 10 different insurances (from auto to home to life). And all of them are trying to scam you.
And they only actually scam you if you actually pay them.
Fun fact: If you sell your car and you don't make sure the new owner titles the car in their name and they get in an accident your insurance may have to pay because the transaction was incomplete.
Make sure you go to the DMV and remove yourself as the owner as soon as or before you sell it
How much do you know about bird law, though?
Depends on the insurance company. In alot of states, the standard ISO policy includes protections for insured drivers on a policy and permissive users.
Multiple insurance policies can actually be in play when permissive use is involved. The primary is almost always the insured vehicle, but the permissive users might come up if the primary vehicle doesn't have enough coverage.
So why did someone with a suspended license living with me raise my rate? According to the insurance company they 'might' try to drive my car. So my rate doubled overnight. My car didn't change, just who was near my keys.
Also depends on the state laws
Because they have access to your keys, "implying" permission
@@emmelleperry9956 So why not exclude them from coverage? And access to my keys is anyone that came over. From parents to landlord.
didn't know that Dave wasn't allowed, good to know
Then why can car rentals use your personal vehicle coverage to cover their rented vehicle?
Good point, not really sure. I think insurance from rental cars typically come from your personal credit card as an added feature.
Not sure if my insurance actually covers rental cars
It's called a "non-owned auto". You're auto insurance (within certain parameters typically) will transfer to a vehicle you don't own.
@@kylemcdade843 it does
@@smolenskkid so *not* insuring a car, but a person. lol
Typically your insurance will follow you to driver other cars that you don’t have regular access to, like rental cars. Your insurance is secondary to any insurance the vehicle may have in that case.
Insurance is a racket mandated by the government. All insurance companies do is deny as much as possible because that's how they make money.
I am an insurance agent, I see how much insurances pay out everyday, this is simply untrue.
@@BKIslandersfanit's not simply untrue, but mostly.
There are companies and agents who do this, and have been caught doing so.
Overall they do a cost analysis and often low ball their offer based on many factors. Work is often put out to the lowest bidder or who can meet the insurances numbers
These are the "approved vendors" for most insurance. Those they work with often only meet their numbers by cutting corners, or subcontracting those that do.
In reality the company, and everyone else, has to make money. Paying salaries, buildings, rent etc.
At each step and interaction someone is extracting value or money, this is a simple fact.
This value is lost by the insurance holders, transfered the insurance, and others in the chain.
Lol we are literally taught to try to FIND coverage for people when all else fails. The entire process of denying coverage is so arduous and regulated that I'd rather just pay your claim than deal with writing up a reservation of rights in the first place.
Does this apply if your car is stolen? Like, say some clown steals your car, goes for a joyride with his friends, and then launches it into the woods. Is that covered?
Depends on the contract
@@semi.g Yup. And that "Depends" usually comes down to "I wrote it myself! On the PHONE! And SAVED 4000 a year!". Then the accident comes and you have liability only, state minimum, no tow, no rental.
Seeing as that person wouldn’t be “permitted” to drive the car, I would think that the insurance didn’t apply and you would have to sue to recover damages. If you don’t know who caused the damage, either you’d better hope your insurance company takes mercy on you or you have additional coverage for a situation like that.
Likely yes because that would be considered theft and or vandalism which are covered under the comprehensive coverage if you choose to carry it.
Feeling oddly proud of fictitious sober Darren 👏🏆.
So wait
They can’t exclude anyone who they don’t know about?🤷🏼♂️😂
They can with conditions, like they can exclude drivers under the age of 25 or over the age of 75.
Named individuals are more rare, usually involving past incidents between the excluded driver, your insurance, and yourself - like if you give permission to Dave to drive, and Dave crashes the car almost everytime you let Dave drive, your insurance might eventually say that they won't insure any more damages because Dave was driving.
Well, not exactly. For instance, if I drive another person's car, my insurance carries with me so long as I am not driving that car for more than 30 calendar days per year. In most policies, both the owner of the policy and the driver of the car are covered. It's just that the insurance that carries the vehicle information is typically primary.
go try to get vehicle insurance on a vehicle that doesn't exist
Must be country specific . As in the UK it's as you said
In the US if you test drive a vehicle from the dealer and wreck it then it will be you and your insurance that is liable to the dealership car and whoever you hit if your fault. So be careful with just minimum coverage, you may be paying for multiple sets of damages.
In Colorado, if someone jumps your barbed wire fence and steals one of your concrete trucks and crashes, you get sued.
Civil law, lol.
Interestingly, Russian policy is the reverse: you have to be explicitly listed in the papers to be eligible. (There are exceptions, but they are much more expensive.)
Same in most US states. This lawyer is wrong.
The insurance company won't allow a permissive driver to be someone who lives at your home, at least in some jurisdictions. If your roommate crashes your car and they aren't named insured or an additional driver, you might be denied a claim. It's definitely worth looking into.
I’m not “Sober Darren”…
Or “Not Sober Darren”
How does someone get excluded from being your permissive driver?
Usually it’s age. For example, on my policy, anyone 22 or older can be a permissive driver.
Age (too old or too young), driving history (DUI history, license revocation, no license), health (seizures, sedating medication, certain mental health disorders).
Essentially, anything that reasonably increases the risk something bad is going to happen.
Some people on your excluded list become non-excluded in the event of a qualified emergency, but usually that being young people or people whose conditions are well-controlled
When I was in college, I was not a driver for 80% of the year and taking me off the policy lowered the premium but that made me a non permissive driver.
I can give you an answer to this. If someone lives with you or is named in the registration/contract you ONLY HAVE TWO OPTIONS:
1) Included, meaning you provide that person’s driver license information and specifically add them as a driver. They will be rated as a driver and your price will fluctuate depending on their age, experience, and driving history. (tickets & accidents count)
2) Excluded, although this person lives in the home or is named in the registration/contract they are specifically excluded. This means they could drive the car, but the insurance policy specifically will not cover any claims if there is an incident and this person was the one driving in that moment.
It has to do with age. It’s not illegal for a younger person to drive your car but your insurance might not cover it.
So if I have classic insurance and I drive my car 95% if the time - and one night I don’t feel so comfortable to drive so I let my sober friend drive, then I’m ok? My parents always taught me that this was wrong and to NEVER let anyone who is not explicitly on your policy operate your car
Under 99% of insurance permissive drivers are allowed and covered.
The advice isn't terrible becuase you are trusting your vehicle and potential insurance claim to someone else, but that's no reason to not let a sober friend drive you home (as long as they have a license and are trustworthy)
@@LordVis thank you! 🥰
I have Mercury Insurance and they exclude any driver that lives with you. If you want that person to be able to drive your car, you have to add them to your policy. Mercury's reasoning is that they can't be a permissive driver because they theoretically have regular access to your car. It's a little annoying, but it keeps abuse down and the rates from going up as fast. I've had them for almost 20 years in multiple incidents (a couple that were my fault) and they're a little tough, but mostly fair and they've covered me well.
how the fuck does a legal driver that lives with you and is allowed to drive your car via your permission have anything to do with "abuse" of the system?
@@1369Stileswhat they mean by abuse is having a driver in your house who drivers yours cars but you don’t add them to the policy so you don’t have to pay for them. It’s common with teenage drivers because they’re so much more expensive some people will try to avoid paying for them by just not adding them to the policy. Without an exclusion in place, they would be covered without the customer having to pay for it.
@@Darruus why is the default for that teenagers. you could have a friend living with you; you could have a brother, or cousin, or other relative with you.
there is a reason that i mentioned "legal" driver......if any "legal" driver is considered a permissive driver, then NOT adding that person to the policy is by definition not abusing the system.
i get the teenager thing.....but as soon as they turn 18, that exclusion should be null and void. (assuming they are fully licensed to drive)
@@1369Stiles Because being a "legal" driver is only part of the story. Even though the insurance follows the car, not all drivers are considered equal risk and that's why not all drivers will be given the same monthly premium for the exact same car in the same zip code.
Maybe you're a decent driver, but you decide to let your cousin who lives with you (who is without a car because they totaled theirs...again) drive your extra car every day to work. Under the "permissive" driver loophole that crappy driver isn't paying into the system that they are then most likely going to take money out of. The idea of the "permissive" driver was to allow one-off situations. Not for your terrible driver of a cousin to have regular access to a car and a payment system they don't contribute to. That, unfortunately, affects everyone.
You also have to be careful who you let drive your car on your policy. If they seriously injur or kill someone, especially recklessly, YOU can be sued in civil court by the injured party (or their estate) for allowing a demonstrated menace to have your keys. You don't want to put yourself in that situation.
@@WarmestComputer "isnt paying into the system".......thats what its all about for you and for the insurance company, isnt it. so never mind that the insurance system is a scam in the first place (im not saying we dont need insurance, just that its a corrupt business model); never mind that you could pay "into the system" for a decade with no claims, but then as soon as you do have a claim, they will either drop you as a customer, or raise your rates.
all that aside, its not abuse or fraud to allow someone to use your car without putting them on your policy. your entire rant was based on the worst possible scenario, rather than the majority of what average joes experience is.......which is that most driving experiences are mundane, and uneventful.
also.....if i own a car, and i let someone use my car on a regular basis for, lets say 10 yrs, and not a single accident happens, yet i get into 5 accidents in those ten years......as the person on the insurance policy, how is me not having the other person on my insurance abuse or fraud, when im the one costing the insurance company a shit ton of money. oh, thats right.....if the other person had been on the insurance, my premiums would have been higher, and the insurance company would not have lost so much money on my accidents.
capitalism.....you gotta love it.
anything else you want to defend the multibillion dollar industry about?
Depends on state. I had to get commercial insurance to allow others to drive my truck. If they regularly drive, I have to name them on the insurance. Personal insurance in my state coves you no matter what car you're operating (as long as you have permission) check with your insurance company/policy on this one.
It’s not like that in Virginia. All household members have to be listed if you get caught refusing to list them they will cancel you
That's some bulshit insurance companies came up with in order to force everyone into buying insurance
That's what I thought. But I thought that only applies if you want them to *ever* drive your vehicle....
@@alexdhall nope. In Virginia it’s anyone who has a license. The only exceptions are unlicensed members, and those with their own policy.
@@adamcouch1540Virginia has the most unlicensed drivers in the US because everybody has a suspended one. High time to inspect the laws regarding that, methinks.
@@doomsdayrabbit4398 They did and it’s going to get worse July 1st. They removed the uninsured motorist exception. Meaning any vehicle with active and tags and no insurance is going to have a suspended license. It’s estimated 10,000 more suspensions July 1st
Completely the opposite In the uk
IIRC Allstate tried to blanketly say that anyone not on the policy is an excluded driver last time I tried to get my insurance.
In some states full exclusion is not permitted, so instead the insuramce company charges you an extra arm & leg if there is a young person in the house that would otherwise be excluded, as if they were a regular driver of your car.
i could understand both sides of this. People might not fully understand the excluded driver part, and they are effectively an uninsured motorist then. On the flipside it sucks to pay extra because you have a 16 year old kid who would not be driving that car
Courts have found that having non declared drivers living in your home can retroactively revoke your insurance, even if they were not driving the car.
Courts don't need to declare it haha it's on the terms that you sign when you bind the policy
used to have St. Farm, my son was dropped by SF. Since he did not have his own car, I had to change Insurance companies. SF used to cover me when renting a vehicle. New company does not do that. Never realized it was the car, and not me covered. Thanks for the information
Are you expected to have household members on your car insurance policy though? Otherwise your wife or son could just be permissive drivers
Generally you should not need to add them to your policy because of permissive driver benefits. Read your policy and make sure there are no specific exclusions to this. It can increase your policy rates naming household members, and that only benefits the insurance company.
Yes. Everyone with constant access to the vehicle. They will cancel you otherwise
@@battleskill23 generally you should be sure when reading your policy and call to be sure. Your spouse and children may need to be excluded or named or added as additional drivers. Your roommate may need to be listed as an additional driver if they ever do it. Some policies will not let people who live with you be permissive drivers.
Read your policy. Typically you must notify the company of any person of driving age in the household. If you have a child that becomes old enough to drive and you don't tell them they can cancel you or deny a claim if they find out about the child.
I used to hate when people would tell me someone isn't on their insurance so they can't drive.
Some insurers require a specific rider clause, or it's not covered.
That’s how insurance can work (how mine does). It also makes perfect sense.
Should someone that’s an absolute horrible driver pay the same rates as someone with a clean record? And if it were solely applied to and dependent on the car, what’s to stop someone with a clean record from getting cheap insurance for someone with multiple previous DWIs?
I have an impeccable driving record and pay less than $50 a month on my truck. My brother has multiple accidents, a prior suspended license, and the same model/year truck and pays $150+ a month for the same coverage. Should he be covered under my policy? Should I be able to insure his truck so he pays less?
Pretty sure this doesn’t apply everywhere
Really depends on your insurance though. Where I live the standard insurance is only for you and your partner. You can pay for your kids to be added later though, and there are insurances that let anyone over a certain age drive.
Must be country specific . In the UK it's the driver that's insured to drive that car . Only named drivers can drive
This is incorrect in Michigan, your car insurance follows you around for the purposes of PIP. If a car slams into you as a pedestrian, you’re filing a claim on your own insurance.
This is true but only a few states does the insurance follow the driver.
Depends on what kind of car insurance you have I do believe. Because you can get insurance on your driver's license so technically that would be the insured person and not the car
no no no, i am not insured AND neither is my car.
???
I went to college to be an engineer on ships. The jobs were few and far between at that time. I stayed at my parents for a bit, doing odd jobs to pay the bills, while I was applying for those shipping jobs. I had to specifically exclude my Lil' Bro from my vehicle's insurance policy. Mom and Dad had him on their policies. I explained to him that if he ever tried to drive my vehicle, I would report it stolen. I had to emphasize that the fact that he was a teenage male would have nearly tripled the cost of my policy the moment that I shared a household with him, unless I excluded him by name. The threat of jail got through to him. We never had an issue.😂
It depends on your policy. If you are a pedestrian and hit by someone who runs off, your uninsured motorists coverage covers your injuries. In your excluded operator example, the person who owns the cars policy won't cover but the drivers policy will, if they have one. The are also nonowners policies to help give coverage to people who don't own vehicles.
I learned this the hard way: My GF borrowed my car, wrecked it (her fault), and even though she had her own insurance, it was MY insurance that paid, and my rates subsequently went up.
Remember kids, when you let someone borrow your car, you’re ALSO letting them borrow your insurance policy.
It depends on the state you reside in. Some states are insurance that follows the driver and other states are insurance that follow the vehicle. It is very important to read your policy for your insurance and ask questions. The policy is a binding contract between you and your insurance company that can help you or hurt you.
Should also be noted that if there is an excluded driver on a policy it is likely that driver cant stop hitting things with their car in the first place
Or they are just a minor.
@brett. No. I needed to stay with my parents for a bit after college graduation. My Lil' Bro was a teenage male. The moment that were were living under the same roof, he was considered a hazard to my insurance policy and the quotes were roughly three times the cost. By specifically excluding him by name, I was able to keep my policy cost the same.
I specifically have liability insurance that follows me. I don't currently own a vehicle, but I drive other's.
That’s a very specific type of insurance. It’s primarily used for people who rent cars often. It’s also just a way insurance companies sell you a product you don’t really need.
Yeah, broadform. You’re right that’s different. The car you’re driving won’t be covered tho, only another persons car if you cause damage
@@evanshively1294I don't rent but drive multiple and my insurance follows be around unless I'm driving a company vehicle (because when I'm on their time their insurance supersedes mine)
@@Cmanisthecoolestthat isn't always true
There is no collision or comprehensive coverage, only liability. The insurance company didn’t try to sell me it, I had to ask for it. I drive others vehicles often and wanted to make sure that I have enough liability coverage while driving regardless of what they may have.
Another thing worth noting is a lot of policys basically have a thing where if someone is driving the car a certain amount they are supposed to be on the policy and if not they arent covered as a permissive driver, usually this is only a factor if its like your child who lives in your house because its hard to prove
Insurance is such a scam
Collision and comprehensive cover your car, but your liability limits follow you as a driver.
Not the generic ad music that I cant get away from 😂
This is mostly true. There are exceptions where your policy would follow you as the driver. Temporary replacement vehicles such as rentals or a loaner from a dealership. Your liability can follow you as well if you have a primary/excess situation. Where the policy on the car has a limits issue. Of course, some of this depends on your location and specific policy.
Just to add on to this, check with your insurance agent/company first. The coverage on the rental car is usually the same as the coverage on your own policy, so if you have liability only coverage, there might be coverage for anyone you hit, but not coverage for damage to the rental car you are driving. If you have multiple cars insured with multiple companies it might not be clear which insurance company should be covering the car which can get messy if there’s a claim.
There's a car rental company in Charlotte nc that makes you use your insurance if there's an accident. Based on what you said, our insurance wouldn't cover the rental car if we were driving?
There are further complexities past what he explained. For example, in most states, under most policies, if the insurance policy tied to a given car does not pay out (or if it does not exist), the driver’s primary policy will pay out, up to its maximums. As long as you had the car less than 30 days, and it was rented from a licensed and bonded rental company
You can get specific "borrowed vehicle" coverage. I had this for a while after highschool, because I'd be the sober driver and some of my friends didn't always keep insurance, and the company I worked for was grossly under insured.
There’s a provision somewhere in most auto insurance that states that household members are excluded.
In my experience, most auto insurance says that household members are explicitly included.
There is an expectation that if others in the household use the car then they should be listed as drivers on the policy. The one off designated driver is one thing. There is too much additional risk when there is only 1 driver listed but unlisted others have regular access to the vehicle.
This isn't entirely accurate. I am a named driver on my policy, which gives me at least state minimum coverage on any vehicle I drive.
But that's assuming that the car you are driving is also insured.
@@ke6gwf and that he doesn't own a car or have regular access to any
The last time I let someone drive my car he ran a red light 😭
What about the scenario where you get into an accident, the car is fine but you get injured.
Then no accident occurred.
Or miss & run, but good luck with that one.
Happened to me. Hurt my left toe when I was in my car, went to the hospital and after I told them what had happened, they wanted my car insurance card, not my medical insurance.
As an adjuster, I will tell you, it depends. Each claim is adjusted based on the facts of loss, the policy coverages, and the laws and regulations of the location where the loss occurred. As for why the hospital wanted your car insurance vs your medical insurance: if the injury to your toe is determined to be covered under your car insurance, there are no pre-negotiated payment plans like there are going to be with your medical insurance. The hospital is looking at the potential of making more money.
Really depends on your insurance. I've had insurance that cover me driving other vehicles.
Your insurance is secondary when driving another vehicle
so if Darren gets into a crash and is found to be at fault, does that mean that your rates are going up because of Darren's mistake?
you let darren drive the car; you let darren get in the crash; you made the insurance company pay up; so it makes sense that your rates go up
I don't know the actual answer, but it sounds fair enough. It is your decision to let him drive your car
Yes.
@@KTibow looked into it a little and it seems that in most states, both you and Darren's rates would go up (if Darren has insurance, or tries to get insurance in the future). But unlike Darren, you may be able to (in some states) switch insurance companies and not have the accident impact your rates with that new company, as the accident would not be tied to your drivers license and wouldn't be on your personal driving record.
It depends on the state it could be the person the car or even the car and person insured
Same reason why your insurance follows your license plates; turn in your plates if you want to cancel your auto policy!
what companies lol? it’s tied to your VIN
I can speak for NY state as a licensed agent. This is state specific and not up to the insurer
Not in jersey. It's a fucking racket
Have you considered moving out of that Godforsaken state? I've been there once and it was the worst place I have ever been. And it was a "nice" area too.
@@MrWhite2222 moved out 2 years ago
@@appalachianoperator oh that's good to hear. Hope you found a place you like 🙂
@@MrWhite2222 it's hot as all hell down here in georgia but it's great
wish we did this in the uk because we insure the driver not the care meaning we don't have permissive drivers
There is so many nuance to this is crazy, if insurance covers my car and not me, how come I had to settle with my insurance when I was in a not my fault accident in a company truck?
Can you do a video about the other side?
To be more specific, what if I, sober Daren, get behind the wheel of someones car and get in an accident but that person whose car i am driving doesn’t have insurance? Or it’s not enough
Insurance is weird. Every insurance I've had was limited to person and vehicle, not just one, But you CAN insure yourself on any vehicle you drive and insure your car for anyone to drive
British Columbia is like that, I hear.
Do you life in the U.S.? This video is for the U.S.
Ooh, I've always wondered that.
What if someone steals my car and then crashes it? Didn't give them permission.. so will insurance not cover it?
Depends on where you live and if you have that coverage on your vehicle. Might be a good idea to call your insurance company.
The car is covered, so it should be covered. It wouldn't be if you did something to make your car more stealable like leaving the keys inside.
In that case the driver who stole your car would probably pay damages, and my guess is that depending on your plan a comprehensive coverage plan would cover the difference in the value of your car but not in damages the driver did to anything else
You'd face no liability so there's nothing to be covered there. Your property (the car) being covered depends on if you have comprehensive coverage or not.
@@OGimouse1 leaving your keys in your vehicle is entirely irrelevant and wouldn't invalidate a claim. And the car is only covered against theft if you carry comprehensive coverage.
weird. I have to say who can drive except me, and have to pay more (when they are young significantly more (like 70 % more), when they are older just like 20 € more. when I say everyone can drive my car, I have to pay like double the insurance.
I really like Mike Rafi, but FYI, I work in insurance, and it's a little more complicated. You might also lose some or all of your coverages if you have a driver in your house who should be on your policy, but is not on it, and then they get into an accident. I've seen this happen, for example, with parents who "forgot" to add their child to their policy after the child moves back in or gets their license. Permissive use generally applies to someone borrowing the car who is not a usual driver of the car. Anyway, read your insurance policy to be sure.
Dave?
Dave's not here man
sober darren... the lawyer had to add that in just becasue of how life is rn
The is the way it works in the U.S. In the UK, it's the other way round. In the UK, every driver must be specifically named on the policy or they are not insured.
There is one state, South Carolina I think, that requires every licensed driver to carry a liability insurance policy even if they don't own a car. In that state drivers are insured. If the driver of the car isn't on the same policy as the owner of the car the driver's liability has to cover both the car they were driving and any other damage caused.
Just cause you name him darren doesnt mean he belongs to darren
Oh, DEFINITELY don't let Dave drive your car ...
Beauty of teenager drivers. I learned this when my kids were coming up on driving age. Our insurance counted the kids as drivers at age 14 so we had to sign exclusionary form and send it back, and I'm visually disabled and ONLY have a state ID so our insurance has something called disabled medical exclusionary or non driver due to medical form and you tell them your medical condition and you sign that form too
If you’re visually disabled you shouldn’t be driving.
For some reason I’m excluded from driving my own car. Idk why, I only had 4 hit and runs… with police
Well of course the car insurance doesn't cover us but only the car. It would be called Health Insurance if it did
Sometimes you have to spell it out for people
So a carjacking... does auto insurance cover damage during theft?
If you've got comprehensive coverage absolutely. But you wouldn't face any liability for damages caused to others by the carjackers.
Depends on the policy, but not likely
@@jacobgeist6580 What? This is basic stuff. You aren't liable for damages caused by someone who stole your vehicle. Your property, the car, is absolutely covered if you have comprehensive coverage on the policy. If you don't carry comprehensive coverage (and most people do carry it), you'll be on your own for repairing your vehicle.
@austinfontenot8955 I never said you were liable for any other damage caused, but "comprehensive" coverage isn't even a thing, full coverage just means all the things you can be insured for and that varies from state to state and from provider to provider. Also, if you think that most people have full coverage you are hilariously out of touch. Most people (at least under the age of 35) have old ass cars minimum liability coverage. Most wealthy people have full coverage, but the rest of us can't afford it
@@jacobgeist6580 ...are you joking? It's literally called comprehensive coverage. It covers damages that aren't covered by your collision coverage. Things like glass damage, hitting an animal, falling objects, and theft. And yes, it's absolutely the norm to carry it since it's required by almost all lienholders. If your car is financed, there's a 99% chance you're carrying comprehensive coverage. This has nothing to do with the "well ackshually full coverage isn't real" that you brought up. Please stop talking out of your ass.
ETA: I'd say about 80% of the auto policies I write carry comp and collision...
Haha got you law man, I'm insured with a non owner policy. No this is a super useful video tho, just joshing
I'm insured just not by my car insurance and only after I kick the bucket. Got that dead peasant insurance bby! Treated like cattle by corporate america bby!
This is why it annoys me whenever relatives casually loan use of their vehicles, cause if they can't get coverage to repair/replace a vehicle or pay medical bills after a crash then they need to turn to the rest of the family to help them for their dumb mistake
I was on an exclusion list!! I wasn't allowed to drive my moms sleby cobra mustang when I was 18 and she had recently bought it.
Literally about to be issued my insurance license, and knew where this was going.
Thank you, have been wondering about that
I found it funny my dad's insurance covered him, my mom, and any other non-resident in the world. This meant i was the only person in the world not insured to drive his car.
I work in insurance and this is an explanation I have to give to customers at least once a week
I could be wrong, but I believe my state/policy has a rule in their policy where they require anyone old enough to drive within the same household (family or not, just anyone who could drive your car), be included on the policy.
If they are not included or excluded specifically, they claim to have the right to deny a claim.
I believe the thought is that this gets around the permissive use law, at least for lending your car to members in your household.
The exclusion doesn’t work that well in floria. We did well against that one
How does that work with rental cars?
I assume you’ll have to be listed on the contract you sign when renting. If your name isn’t on there, you can’t drive it.
Exactly this@@sideofwinder
So why did I need insurance at 16 to drive my parents car if it was already insured. Please explain.
Because you were excluded
Members of the household need to be added due to the liability coverage. Also there are limits to allowing people to use your car. Anyone who causes an accident in the car the lawsuit goes to whoever is insuring the car. (Named insured/principal) you must legally add all household members to a policy
What about rental cars? My insurance should cover me when I rent a car temporarily like on vacation correct?
Rental cars are just like this. You are the one that signed for it so you are the only permissible driver. Anyone else drives is not covered and you will be responsible because you broke the contract
Insurance seems like a scam lol
Because it is
Then why does my insurance company use who's driving the car as a basis for the rate?
Your insurer uses a lot of factors to determine your rate. Who is driving the car and their driving history is a big one because it allows them to predict the likelihood of an accident.
Little bit off, you can personally be insured too