First of all - sorry about making so many threads about cars / insurance :X



My current insurance (with Quinn Direct) lets me drive my car, but also any other car (albeit it 3rd Party), on the condition it's registered to someone else - now I asked if there were any limits, and the person at Quinn said that the car didn't even need to be insured on it's own, simply that it had to be registered in someone elses name, and that I don't even need to tell the insurance company when I do this.

So, what's stopping me getting an ultra-mega-cheap car to insure and paying £700-£800 to insure it and then going and buying something like this (i.e. a car I actually want), then simply putting my parents in as the registered keeper? I understand they will need to buy Tax (which I would pay for), but will it be allowed for road use without any "dedicated" insurance?

Help please!

Probably because if anyone in the insurance industry susses it's your everyday car, perhaps from V5 mileage, credit card payments for tax/MoT, servicing etc then you're screwed.

If it's family owned then they'll probably guess, especially if your parents have their own cars...

The insurance companies will wriggle out of it 90% of the time. The remaining 10% of the time is why insurance is so high in the UK - people trying to cheat the system. Where do you think the money comes from when you claim fraudulently?

Anyone who 'cheats the system' is undeserving of any respect from anyone.

Because, as Tristan says, they just won't pay up.

How about be normal and insure a car that you can actually afford, build up some experience and no claims and then enjoy a better car when you're a bit older?

Quote from tristancliffe :

Probably because if anyone in the insurance industry susses it's your everyday car, perhaps from V5 mileage, credit card payments for tax/MoT, servicing etc then you're screwed.

If it's family owned then they'll probably guess, especially if your parents have their own cars...

The insurance companies will wriggle out of it 90% of the time. The remaining 10% of the time is why insurance is so high in the UK - people trying to cheat the system. Where do you think the money comes from when you claim fraudulently?

Anyone who 'cheats the system' is undeserving of any respect from anyone.

I'm not cheating the system if they've told me that I can drive any car I like as long as it's not registered to me.

Will ring up and double check, though...

It is known as 'Fronting' and they are clamping down on it.

I just looked on quinn, and the open insurance (I presume thats where u drive anyones car) is for 25+.... I didn't think it was possible for a "member of public" to drive on a policy to drive anybody's car, thought that was down to police/government officials only.

You can get it on certain insurance policys (rather, certain companys), but as a result it's much more expensive than one without..

A waste of time IMO, if you drive someone's car that much you should get put down as a second driver in the first place..

Quote from Bean0 :

It is known as 'Fronting' and they are clamping down on it.

I thought Fronting was mis-representation (i.e. lying?) if the person I spoke to is right (and she may of not known) then it's not applicable in this case.


Like I said - I will call again to double-check everything.

You are lying...It's your car registered under false pretences.
Stop behaving like a dole-scum chav and do it properly.

Also, it would only actually be insured whilst you are driving it.
Without cover on it's own, any break-ins, or if it rolls into something would not be covered.

But, by insuring a cheap car to allow 'free' insurance on a faster one IS lying and IS fronting. It is not legal, it is dishonest, it's not moral or fair, and that sort of thing is one of the reasons why young people get such high policies.

And it's should have, may have etc, not may of...

Quote from Bean0 :

Stop behaving like a dole-scum chav and do it properly.

Mmm, words of wisdom there LOL

Quote from tristancliffe :

But, by insuring a cheap car to allow 'free' insurance on a faster one IS lying and IS fronting. It is not legal, it is dishonest, it's not moral or fair, and that sort of thing is one of the reasons why young people get such high policies.

And it's should have, may have etc, not may of...

You have "open" insurance because of your workplace, yet it covers you for personal use, too?

How is me having open use, and using it to drive my Dad's car anymore dishonest than you getting your PERSONAL MX5 insured for free?

whats wrong with doing what he wants to do? if his insurance says your covered to drive any vechile not regesters to you i know what i do ( buy a 1 litre fiat panda (fully compif it has to) then drive "my dads" other car.) i see nothing wrong with it all you people says chav scum why? its not like he isnt covered if he hits another car or pedestrion. Id says your stupid if you dont do it!!

Because he's purposefully taking advantage of a loophole to drive a car he wouldn't otherwise be able to insure.. let alone handle (He crashed a Proton into a hedge, and he wants a 180bhp hot hatch? GG)

Quote from Jakg :

You have "open" insurance because of your workplace, yet it covers you for personal use, too?



How is me having open use, and using it to drive my Dad's car anymore dishonest than you getting your PERSONAL MX5 insured for free?

Quote from Jakg :

So, what's stopping me getting an ultra-mega-cheap car to insure and paying £700-£800 to insure it and then going and buying something like this (i.e. a car I actually want), then simply putting my parents in as the registered keeper?

Like I said, do what you want. But if you're not willing to work your way up from the bottom like everyone else has had to do, then one day it will I guarentee you - It will backfire on you..

Because our trade insurance specifically covers me for "Private, Domestic and Leisure" use. I'm not driving on the trade insurance part of it in my free time. And yes, the firm pay a little more for the additional part.

If you were to do it Jack you'd almost certainly get 'done' for not having valid insurance in the event of an accident, and possibly be liable for some of the costs of third party claims.

Quote from tristancliffe :

If you were to do it Jack you'd almost certainly get 'done' for not having valid insurance in the event of an accident, and possibly be liable for some of the costs of third party claims.

What a load of bull!!! if he did have a accident they would ask him to produce his certificate which says "insured to drive any other vechile not own or rented by him" then they would check their system showing it registered to his dad meaning hes covered.

Then they'd read a bit more and find the fifty or so get-out clauses - minimum ages, minimum experience, using the freely insured car as the usual car and the insurace car as a cheap way of avoiding paying what he owes. You don't have a lot of experience with insurance companies, do you?

'Being covered' isn't enough to actually be legal - and insurance fraud certainly isn't legal.

Quote from Xaid0n :

I just looked on quinn, and the open insurance (I presume thats where u drive anyones car) is for 25+.... I didn't think it was possible for a "member of public" to drive on a policy to drive anybody's car, thought that was down to police/government officials only.

There are policy's out there that allow you to drive anyone elses car, one being a motor traders policy, there obviously are others, but that is just one

Insurance companies will use ANY excuse to wriggle out of a claim, and by fronting, you are giving them an excuse.

It is very unusual for a policy to allow you to drive any other car that isn't already insured.

Quote from tombarlin :

What a load of bull!!! if he did have a accident they would ask him to produce his certificate which says "insured to drive any other vechile not own or rented by him" then they would check their system showing it registered to his dad meaning hes covered.

What happens when someone hits a car with your family in and isn't properly insured...

Apparently you won't be able to keep a car without insurance unless its SORN from during 2009.

well id be pissed off. But Jack would be insured!! HE WOULDNT BE BRAKING ANY LAW!!! the only thing is the insurance would say this policy is intended for occasional useage. Fine but whos to say what occasional is? twice a week?

But he wants to use the better car completely, and just have the cheap, shitty car there for fraudulent insurance. It's one thing to borrow a car because you need to get to work and your own has broken down - you'd be covered 3rd party. But it's quite another to pretend to only use it now and again and actually use it as your main car. That is, quite simply, fraud.

You'd be more pissed off when you went to jail or had £500 removed from your wages every month for 30 years.

Occasional would most certainly not extend to getting his parents to have a car registered in their name (that they don't use), and for him to drive it on a 'regular' basis, ie 3 times a week to daily. Occasional would probably be once weekly at most frequent..

And I'm 99% sure there will be a minimum age of say.. 25 or someone who's been driving for x amount of years!

Quote from tristancliffe :

Then they'd read a bit more and find the fifty or so get-out clauses - minimum ages, minimum experience, using the freely insured car as the usual car and the insurace car as a cheap way of avoiding paying what he owes.

there are lots of clauses, but i would satisfy all of them...

EDIT - No minimum age is listed, and nowhere in my policy document does it state I cannot use it as my main car.

Are you sure? Have you already checked. Have you read all the small print? All of it? ALL of it? And you've confirmed that you WILL be insured when you hit a child after buying two cars, and insuring only the cheaper one directly in a conscious move to avoid paying money?

Get THAT in writing and you'll be fine. Otherwise don't risk it.