I posed this question to many auto agents. I've been insured with a large auto company for 25 yrs. I insured my first kid but not my second. Every agent told me the car is covered period. 6 weeks ago my son totaled my car and did big damage to the other car. A total of $25k of damage. The insurance company never once asked me why my child was not insured and paid the claim flawlessly.Its my first claim in 25 yrs. So why insure your child?
Why Put Your Child on Your Policy?
- Thread starter BibH
- Start date
- 6,455
Because it is a legal requirement for a driver on the roadways to have liability insurance?
Because as an insurance agent representing insurance companies, you want to see insureds correctly rated for risk and you want to model that behavior for your children?
Most decent policies include as insureds any family members who are residents of your household. Even if you don't report a child, mother in law, uncle, or whomever who is living with you, they are an insured while driving most any auto. Any other permissive drivers are covered under your policy only while driving an auto declared on your policy. There are exceptions to this and some insurers use driver exclusion endorsements, but for most policies, coverage for your resident children is automatic.
You report them so that the insurance company can underwrite your account and charge for them since they increase the risk of loss. That's only fair. Failure to play by the rules means that other insureds are subsidizing you. More important, if you deliberately conceal or misrepresent their existence or use, then you are likely guilty of fraud which is likely a felony in your state.
You report them so that the insurance company can underwrite your account and charge for them since they increase the risk of loss. That's only fair. Failure to play by the rules means that other insureds are subsidizing you. More important, if you deliberately conceal or misrepresent their existence or use, then you are likely guilty of fraud which is likely a felony in your state.
- 1,581
I know plenty of companies that would pursue you for material misrepresentation & deny that claim. The fact you had your 1st kid on at one time & then not the 2nd would bury you in the eyes of SIU. I have seen it happen on more then 1 occasion. I would say 80% of carriers would just pay the claim. But really, what insurance professional is compromising their license & family's financial peace by trying to save a few bucks? I mean....really...cmon.
I have also seen a situation where your kid at college is using your vehicle (but he's not listed on the policy.) Your kid (for whatever reason) one day has his buddy drive them home from where they're at. His buddy as an accident w/ your vehicle. Your carrier denies the claim because your kid wasn't listed on the policy & didn't have the ability to exercise the permissive use extension.
I've also seen a kid hit by a drunk driver at college while walking & suffer substantial permanent injuries. The kid was not listed as a driver & they pursued UM for the kid. Safeco dragged it through litigation ultimately buried them where their attorney gave up on it. Maybe if they had an attorney with a bigger law firm in a major metropolitan city with deep pockets they could have prevailed.
The was a 500k + claim. The kid is permanently disabled. It's sufficient to say all their lives are forever changed for the worse.
Years ago i would say "ya know what...it really doesn't matter." But through my years of experience & seeing the worst case scenarios happen....it's not worth saving the few $'s per month to risk it.
I have also seen a situation where your kid at college is using your vehicle (but he's not listed on the policy.) Your kid (for whatever reason) one day has his buddy drive them home from where they're at. His buddy as an accident w/ your vehicle. Your carrier denies the claim because your kid wasn't listed on the policy & didn't have the ability to exercise the permissive use extension.
I've also seen a kid hit by a drunk driver at college while walking & suffer substantial permanent injuries. The kid was not listed as a driver & they pursued UM for the kid. Safeco dragged it through litigation ultimately buried them where their attorney gave up on it. Maybe if they had an attorney with a bigger law firm in a major metropolitan city with deep pockets they could have prevailed.
The was a 500k + claim. The kid is permanently disabled. It's sufficient to say all their lives are forever changed for the worse.
Years ago i would say "ya know what...it really doesn't matter." But through my years of experience & seeing the worst case scenarios happen....it's not worth saving the few $'s per month to risk it.
- 977
Because it's the honest thing to do?
Because failing to do so could potentially void your coverage from date of inception for material misrepresentation?
Because most people never read their policy and don't realize many carriers provide coverage for named drivers only?
Because depending on the state and policy contract, non rated drivers might only be extended state minimum liability coverage, and you could find yourself subject to a lawsuit seeking your home, assets, and wages as damages, that could have been otherwise prevented?
Because this practice of conveniently neglecting to add children as rates drivers causes your risk factor to be incorrectly rated, and is a HUGE factor in unacceptably high loss ratios and EVERYONE bearing the brunt of unprecedented premium increases the past few years (unfairly so for many), and to continue for more years to come?
Because the history of coverage will soften the blow for your kid when they move out, and they will qualify for better pricing when they purchase their own insurance? Not only will it be easier on their budget, but they will be able to get QUALITY insurance from the get-go, and not a stripped-out policy because it's all they can afford?
Take your pick.
Because failing to do so could potentially void your coverage from date of inception for material misrepresentation?
Because most people never read their policy and don't realize many carriers provide coverage for named drivers only?
Because depending on the state and policy contract, non rated drivers might only be extended state minimum liability coverage, and you could find yourself subject to a lawsuit seeking your home, assets, and wages as damages, that could have been otherwise prevented?
Because this practice of conveniently neglecting to add children as rates drivers causes your risk factor to be incorrectly rated, and is a HUGE factor in unacceptably high loss ratios and EVERYONE bearing the brunt of unprecedented premium increases the past few years (unfairly so for many), and to continue for more years to come?
Because the history of coverage will soften the blow for your kid when they move out, and they will qualify for better pricing when they purchase their own insurance? Not only will it be easier on their budget, but they will be able to get QUALITY insurance from the get-go, and not a stripped-out policy because it's all they can afford?
Take your pick.
Last edited:
One of our primary carriers will pay...minus the premium that should have been paid for the youthful since the inception date of getting his/her license.
I totally get why people don't add their kids...but I also totally get accountability. This make me a big fan of the carrier's way of handling these claims for unlisted household drivers.
Also, check back with us prior to your next renewal and lets see if your carrier is as forgiving as you're thinking.
I totally get why people don't add their kids...but I also totally get accountability. This make me a big fan of the carrier's way of handling these claims for unlisted household drivers.
Also, check back with us prior to your next renewal and lets see if your carrier is as forgiving as you're thinking.
- 6,455
That's what I'm interested in hearing about-Premium changes and listed driver requirements at the next annual renewal.
- 15,041
This is a bigger issue than you realize.
More carriers are explicitly denying coverage for drivers not listed on the policy. Allstate is currently rolling this out nationwide. At least in Tennessee they are still leaving liability coverage, but they are excluding collision damage for any driver that was unlisted and should have been listed. Meaning family member or someone residing in the house for more than 90 days.
More carriers are explicitly denying coverage for drivers not listed on the policy. Allstate is currently rolling this out nationwide. At least in Tennessee they are still leaving liability coverage, but they are excluding collision damage for any driver that was unlisted and should have been listed. Meaning family member or someone residing in the house for more than 90 days.
We just paid a huge claim on a 17 year old driver listed on the policy. We paid the max BI on auto and since the guy that was hit was young and healthy and now will be hospitalized the rest of his life, I expect the father will get sued and we will pay out the max on liability on home too. Fingers crossed it's enough to make them go away and he gets to keep his home and assets but who knows? If that driver wasn't listed...he for sure would be in a world of hurt. The child is now 18 and far away at college and excluded and because he did everything right, he hasn't been dropped.
