[SoYank]

I'm just thinking about how it was when I was sharing a car with my sister. I was forever putting gas in and she was forever burning it back out.

Using fueling statements as proof of quantity of use can also be argued as not being an accurate assessment of use. Like with my sister, if the father uses the car a lot, but the son then goes to use it and is the unfortunate driver of record when the tank needs replenishment, wouldn't his payments skew the evidence? Same as with servicing. If he's the one to have to take it in because the father is unable, the son is now shown on the service receipt. Neither of these cases would be accurate indications of true use.

The OPs best evidence would be neighbor affidavits.

[willhollin]

I always thought insurance premiums were based on the highest risk driver anyway.

[lons]

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

Aye.

I gave him the benefit of the doubt right from the start but caveated this kind of stuff too.

Let's be honest, we almost certainly KNOW the score, however most of us have been there too. And not forgetting that really, the cost of insurance (as I have ranted about before) is totally unacceptable.

If the OP had been quoted £3000 for insurance but had set his heart on the car, who can blame him?

I know I have been there - no longer - but for many years I was insured under my Girlfriends policy for just that reason.

Question is, do we all want the OP to succeed because we feel for him? Or would we rather he didn't because it is this kind of thing which puts insurance up for everyone?

My view is - the cause of this claim was a crime and the right and moral thing would be that he gets his money back. He wasn't driving like a clown and crashed, although one could argue an older, more experienced person might have taken more care. Conversely though, could have been even easier to do over.

I don't personally aspire to the Laws of England at all. I conform to my own moral code of laws... Dungeon and Dragons would called me 'Chaotic Good' and it just so happens that most of my views do conform to what is legal.

To reiterate, in this case, I don't care if the OP has broken the LAW, I would rather he got his money back, bought a Fiesta, insured it himself and learnt his fucking lesson!

Matt

I agree with most of that and we'd all be sympathetic to the reasons for fronting a policy but if you can't afford to insure legally then buy an older or a cheaper model. Can still get a decent bimmer surely for the price of a conv with change for the insurance?

If a driver with a "fronted" policy gets rumbled his policy is ALWAYS voided and this is usually following an incidet or accident. That accident could be with any one of us in which case OUR policy pays the bill - That's why insurance is expensive - along with the risk assessment based on age, gender, car, area, mileage.

DXB is spot on - get a Fiesta and build a history.

[willhollin]

Originally Posted by lons

DXB is spot on - get a Fiesta and build a history.

Carlos hasn't told us what happened to all those Fiestas he used to have yet.

[lons]

Originally Posted by Teutonicdriver

The OP stated the car was "My car" but he was not the main driver.... Yeah...that will be right.
Its all very well making your insurance cheaper by decieving the Insurance Comany but when it comes to them not paying thats not fair?
Sorry but I have no sympathy, Ive had to pay a bloody fortune since I started driving and a proportion of that is to compensate Insurance companies for fraudulent claims. I expect those companies to do their bit to reduce those costs by being more savvy with those that would try to either claim in dodgy circumstances or those that decide they dont want to pay the going rate like I have to, and give the companies dodgy info in their insurance application.
When something looks like a fish and smells like a fish its generally a fish.

+1

I'm 11 weeks down the line on a travel insurance claim (early return from OZ due to death of father in law).
Because of all the 1000s of arseholes who make false claims, mine although 100% honest is being looked at suspiciously and delayed and I don't blame them really.
It will be paid but this wouldn't have happened not so many years ago!


I really feel for this guy though and hope he gets it sorted out and learns a big lesson.

But............................

Surely there's little doubt who's car it is really no matter who does the most mileage - quote "my dad is retired and when we were looking at buying a car i wanted the bmw where he would have gone down a toyota route." and the balance of probability strongly suggests "fronted" even if not a blatant false declaration.

Hope the BMW assurance guys don't access this forum!

I think rather than dishonest, he's probably been naive but think that if the insurance company dig their heels in he's stuffed

[lons]

Originally Posted by willhollin

Carlos hasn't told us what happened to all those Fiestas he used to have yet.

Think my daughter bought one of them 'cause it goes like stink but shreds tyres like confetti

[toxicnerve]

Originally Posted by lons

Hope the BMW assurance guys don't access this forum!

Hrm...good point.

[E92westy]

He's fronting.

He's been caught out.

He's fucked.

Period.

"bmw330dconv has not made any friends yet"

No way....

Has not replied since Tuesday.

[pjs]

Originally Posted by E92westy

He's fronting.

He's been caught out.

He's fucked.

Period.

"bmw330dconv has not made any friends yet"

No way....

Has not replied since Tuesday.

Harsh but almost certainly true

[E92Fan]

This thread is being closed, pending ongoing legal processes