18 yr old male, no car, just got his license, is a student in college
Total Comments: 11
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:07 am Post Subject:
Okay, even if the driver don't own a car but is going to drive the parent's car, he should be included in the policy. That is the way auto insurance industry works. Also, if he is going to drive a friend's car on a regular basis, he should then look for non-owner's insurance. But at any stage the driver shouldn't drive without being insured. It would severely affect his future insurability prospects if caught driving without coverage.
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:46 am Post Subject:
I don't know of any law that states if you're 18 and have a license that you are required to have insurance. The law is almost always that you need to have insurance when operating a vehicle.
Why should a person have insurance? Well, I think that should be obvious.
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 01:26 pm Post Subject:
tcope,
Your comment:
The law is almost always that you need to have insurance when operating a vehicle.
The way you say it, kind-of implies _You_ the individual person needs to have their own insurance.
Wouldn't it be (clearer) more accurate to state:
" The Law is almost always that the Vehicle needs to be insured when operating on Public Roads. "
Just My Thoughts.
FK,
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:11 am Post Subject:
well, i dont see any need in having auto insurance if you're not going to drive. however, should you be drive your parents' or friends' car, you'll need to be included in their policy. an auto insurance is neccessary only when you're behind the wheels of a vehicle. like jeorge said, a driver shouldn't be driving around without being insured.
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:25 am Post Subject:
should you be drive your parents' or friends' car, you'll need to be included in their policy.
seven7 is right. Why take chances. It's better to have a policy just in case anything goes wrong.
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 01:35 pm Post Subject:
Hi,
like jeorge said, a driver shouldn't be driving around without being insured.
I guess it's all about the risks associated with an uninsured or an under-insured driver. Whenever you're driving out you're supposed to share the same responsibility that a legitimate car owner is sharing. It doesn't make any difference to a person who gets hurt as a result of your negligence.
ArindamSenIndies
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:02 pm Post Subject:
Whenever you're driving out you're supposed to share the same responsibility that a legitimate car owner is sharing
Very true Arin.
Since OP you have a license, you will sometimes be driving ( I am only assuming) and since you do not own a car it will be someone else's car you will be driving. Anyone will trust you more with their car if you have auto insurance rather than if you don't. If you happen to get involved in an accident (whosever's fault it may be) who do you think will be expected to pay? Again if you have an auto accident and are not insured you may have difficulties in getting auto insurance in the future.
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:57 pm Post Subject: insurance
So...............everyone is suggesting the College Student should get Insurance just to 'cover his back', sort-to-speak? It DOES make sense. However........I thought if he drove someone else's car,that he IS 'covered' under THEIR policy.
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 07:08 am Post Subject:
I thought if he drove someone else's car,that he IS 'covered' under THEIR policy.
The driver would be covered under the vehicle owners policy as a permissive driver. But, as Sil has mentioned in her post, anyone would trust you more with coverage than without one.
In some states the policy follows the car. Hence, the claims would be taken care of if the vehicle is insured. In such cases the policy of the owner would act as the primary policy. But in some other states the liability of an incident falls on the motorist. Therefore, one would be better off by carrying coverage on him. And, non-owners policy is their answer.
~Jeremy
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 09:10 am Post Subject:
But, as Sil has mentioned in her post, anyone would trust you more with coverage than without one.
Yea..I can 'ssee' that. I have a very good friend who drives my car, sometimes. She has her OWN Auto Insurance ( she owns her own car). Once in a while, she'll drive my car to get a Tune-Up on it, etc. I DO feel better that she has her own policy, however. However.....I understand your point.
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:07 am Post Subject:
Okay, even if the driver don't own a car but is going to drive the parent's car, he should be included in the policy. That is the way auto insurance industry works. Also, if he is going to drive a friend's car on a regular basis, he should then look for non-owner's insurance. But at any stage the driver shouldn't drive without being insured. It would severely affect his future insurability prospects if caught driving without coverage.
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:46 am Post Subject:
I don't know of any law that states if you're 18 and have a license that you are required to have insurance. The law is almost always that you need to have insurance when operating a vehicle.
Why should a person have insurance? Well, I think that should be obvious.
Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 01:26 pm Post Subject:
tcope,
Your comment:
The law is almost always that you need to have insurance when operating a vehicle.
The way you say it, kind-of implies _You_ the individual person needs to have their own insurance.
Wouldn't it be (clearer) more accurate to state:
" The Law is almost always that the Vehicle needs to be insured when operating on Public Roads. "
Just My Thoughts.
FK,
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:11 am Post Subject:
well, i dont see any need in having auto insurance if you're not going to drive. however, should you be drive your parents' or friends' car, you'll need to be included in their policy. an auto insurance is neccessary only when you're behind the wheels of a vehicle. like jeorge said, a driver shouldn't be driving around without being insured.
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:25 am Post Subject:
should you be drive your parents' or friends' car, you'll need to be included in their policy.
seven7 is right. Why take chances. It's better to have a policy just in case anything goes wrong.
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 01:35 pm Post Subject:
Hi,
like jeorge said, a driver shouldn't be driving around without being insured.
I guess it's all about the risks associated with an uninsured or an under-insured driver. Whenever you're driving out you're supposed to share the same responsibility that a legitimate car owner is sharing. It doesn't make any difference to a person who gets hurt as a result of your negligence.
ArindamSenIndies
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:02 pm Post Subject:
Whenever you're driving out you're supposed to share the same responsibility that a legitimate car owner is sharing
Very true Arin.
Since OP you have a license, you will sometimes be driving ( I am only assuming) and since you do not own a car it will be someone else's car you will be driving. Anyone will trust you more with their car if you have auto insurance rather than if you don't. If you happen to get involved in an accident (whosever's fault it may be) who do you think will be expected to pay? Again if you have an auto accident and are not insured you may have difficulties in getting auto insurance in the future.
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:57 pm Post Subject: insurance
So...............everyone is suggesting the College Student should get Insurance just to 'cover his back', sort-to-speak? It DOES make sense. However........I thought if he drove someone else's car,that he IS 'covered' under THEIR policy.
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 07:08 am Post Subject:
I thought if he drove someone else's car,that he IS 'covered' under THEIR policy.
The driver would be covered under the vehicle owners policy as a permissive driver. But, as Sil has mentioned in her post, anyone would trust you more with coverage than without one.
In some states the policy follows the car. Hence, the claims would be taken care of if the vehicle is insured. In such cases the policy of the owner would act as the primary policy. But in some other states the liability of an incident falls on the motorist. Therefore, one would be better off by carrying coverage on him. And, non-owners policy is their answer.
~Jeremy
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 09:10 am Post Subject:
But, as Sil has mentioned in her post, anyone would trust you more with coverage than without one.
Yea..I can 'ssee' that. I have a very good friend who drives my car, sometimes. She has her OWN Auto Insurance ( she owns her own car). Once in a while, she'll drive my car to get a Tune-Up on it, etc. I DO feel better that she has her own policy, however. However.....I understand your point.Add your comment