Insurance for a Beetle

No, it's because they are assuming that the YD is not using the car as much as the policy holder and thus there is less risk - if the YD is either the sole or main driver then the risk due to inexperience is much higher and would be reflected in the premium.

What you think, say or lay down doesn't mean a thing, it's what the insurance company said that matters.

You make it sound like every accident a kid has is a mere damage only minor bump. Would it were so. If it were, their premiums would be little different from adults.

Are you so old you don't remember being young and doing the exact opposite your parents said?

I'd also query *expecting* to be able to control what a 25 year old does...

How the f*ck do you make that interpretation? That's not what I said at all. My son's friend killed two teenaged girls in a speed related accident and is currently in jail.

I remember telling my dad to butt out because it was "my car, taxed and insured by me". You appear to assume that today's parents are unable to talk to their kids. The "generation gap" has somewhat closed up these days y'know.

Influence, not control. It's called mutual respect. If I help provide the means I'm allowed to outline a few rules, they're happy with that.

riccip

An occasional reality check doesn't do anyone harm. ;-)

That's a moot point. If they drive it more often and further from home, they will gain the experience they need to drive better. If they have the right attitude to driving and reasonable skill, they should do fine, but as a parent you've got to be able to accept that on occasions something may go wrong.

---- Dave. UK VW Type 3 & 4 Club

But the point Dave was making is relevant i.e. if a parent insures the car to reduce the premiums for the child, then this implies the parent is claiming to be the main driver. If a parent insures a car and declares the kid to be the main driver the cost saving is lost so there is no point.

There are several reasons why young drivers are higher risk, other than lack of experience. They tend to run old bangers which aren't properly maintained with the inherent dangers therein. They are out late in their cars parking near clubs where the risk of vandalism/theft is higher, then drive a car full of friends home who are eager to be impressed by the driver's sporting prowess.

You read all the time about tragic road accidents involving a car full of youths, often overloaded and hence affecting the handling and braking characteristics of what is usually a small car. The potential cost of personal injury claims in such a smash is part of the reason why their insurance is so high. I still maintain a situation where parental influence plays a part is a considerably lower risk. Cars and going out on the razz simply don't mix.

riccip

But all those come down to one thing, lack of experience, either lack of driving or life experience.

You must have some form of special control over your grown up off-spring if you can control what they do when away from your direct influence....

I wish I had 12k, let alone 12k to spend on a car!

-- Howard Rose

It's amazing how much money people are willing to be in hock for just to buy a car these days.....

If I wander around my 'executive' estate here, every other car is nearly new, and has a sticker from the local car supermarket in the rear screen.

It's shocking that anyone thinks that a nearly new Ford or Vauxhall is a good way to blow several thousand pounds - especially at 13% or so APR.

I know why YD are bad on paper - I've been through the worries of letting 3 newly-qualified boys out on the road, and for about 12 years our '82 Polo C has been putting up with their not-so-gentle right feet. Throughout their 'ownership' as the main drivers they have added about 60,000 miles to the 70,000 when we stopped using it as the family car, and it's still holding up admirably with no head gasket problem (we clean up the oil seep occasionally though!). The only damage in that time (touch wood) has been to a door panel due to vandalism when parked outside a girl-friend's house, and we pushed it out and re-painted without claiming. We did tell the insurance company though (material disclosure..).

The point my last mail was attempting to emphasise was that driving a car frequently is the best way to become proficient at driving. The less often they drive, the longer it will take them to become good at driving. A driver's attitude to driving is nothing to do with the driving itself, but the sense of responsibility to themselves, yourself and other road users, and is instilled in them from the start. It's called parenting, and involves hours of building up trust through their younger years rather than threatening them with withdrawal of the priviledge of driving if they mess up once. That way they are driving correctly for the right reasons, and when daddy's not in control, they will still drive correctly (I hope!).

I have never told them not to drink and drive; they just know it as a condition of going to a pub/club and their friends are in on it too. I admire them for that, though not for the amount they drink if they're not driving!

Excess doesn't apply to 3rd party for obvious reasons.