Daughter's insurance is due in July and she will have held a full licence then for 2 years and 9 months. Because she had 10 month policies she can claim 3 years NCB at this renewal.
But... there's a £90 difference in the online quotes if I say she's held her licence for 2 years, compared to 3 years. Would it be reasonably safe to say she's held her licence for 3 years and take the lower quote, or is it dodgy in the extreme?
Si
Well if she has an accident then they'll ask to see her licence. So not only are you making a false statement & driving without insurance, you're going to be a lot more than £90 out of pocket.
Its fraudulently claiming a benefit by making a false declaration.
Heheh, think about it.
2 years 9 months isn't 3 years is it? Claiming this would be dodgy and would perhaps be grounds for the insco to render the policy invalid if they had any reason to investigate.If you're going to fudge it by 3 months, you'd be as well just saying she has 10 years of full licence and getting loads more off[1]. (c:
[1] I never suggested this.
Only if the erroneous declaration had a material effect
Say, an accident due to lack of experience (although the ins co would probably struggle with 3 months) but not to, say, theft of the car. Where in that instance saying you had a garage when you didn't would have an effect but not to running someone over.
Yeah, that's what I thunk.
Although... it doesn't actually ask how long she's had a *full* licence...
;o)
Si
"Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@brightview.co.uk...
How? 10 months is not a year and NCB is measured in years, not multiples of
10months.
If she has held a licence for 3 years then go ahead. If he has not then her insurance is void. She will get 6 points and a huge fine if stopped and details are checked. If she is involved in any accident her licence will be checked. As the driver it is her responsibility to check there is a policy for her to drive the vehicle, so she will get the fine and points, then be chased by the other driver and passengers for money to settle any claims. You will also be prosecuted for fraud. So it might be best to not admit you are genuinely thick! £90 is nothing compared to what you will both get in the way of fines and/or prison for you. I have seen lots of people done for telling porkies when applying for insurance. The funniest thing is, the insurance company never insists on an eye test for any driver, so people with uncorrected sight can drive. It is only after some sort of incident that their sight is tested. Insurance companies are quite happy to keep taking premiums even when they are fully aware a lot of applications are fraudulent. The legal system as it is now also makes it cheaper for people to drive without a licence and insurance. Doctors also have a lot to answer for by NOT informing the DVLA when people shouldn't be driving due to various conditions such as - disabilities that restrict movement, sight problems like cataracts, mental health problems such as depression, illegal drug users, people suffering from epilepsy or heart conditions, people who can't read English or Welsh signs or signals. Also those taking prescription drugs that clearly state a person should not drive.
Wrong.
Apologies for biting. Not to that knob; to everyone else.
Si
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.