Short Term Insurance: Car Insurance Refuses To Pay

Posted on:
1 Apr 2016
Financial, Personal
Posted by:
Trevor Oberholzer

I had a vehicle stolen that my son was driving. The insurance company threw out the claim based on a regular driver principal. My son stated that he was the regular driver i disputed this with the insurance company as i found their regular driver clause very vague. I had myself listed as the regular driver.

One Response to Short Term Insurance: Car Insurance Refuses To Pay

  1. Pierre

    One of the oldest principles in insurance law is that the insured must disclose anything that increases the risk for the insurer. Young people below 25 are generally regarded as a higher risk and their insurance premiums are generally higher than for older people. Especially where you have a regular driver clause it is important to disclose that your son will also be driving the car if that is your intention. This will in all probability then increase your premiums. The courts generally enforce regular driver clauses strictly. If you do not list a third party as a regular driver and the vehicle is damaged or stolen while under control of an unlisted driver, where you have a regular driver clause, the courts generally find in favour of the insurance company who repudiates the claim. See for example LC’s Diary Products v Dial Direct Insurance Ltd (8274/2009) [2010] ZAKZPHC 79 (29 October 2010)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *