elizzza811
Stalwart
- Messages
- 604
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 88
Regarding my auto insurance, I just received a 'refusal to renew' because of my seizures. So as of February, neither of my cars is insured (with them anyway). I'm confused though. Here is the situation...
My license was revoked due to seizures back in May (I think?), so no driver's license for me. My husband, however, does have a valid driver's license.
I have 2 cars.
- One I own. It is registered and titled in my name only.
- The other one I don't own (it is being financed), but the loan for it is in my name only, and it is registered in my name only (though my husband had to sign for me to register it, since I've no driver's license).
What confuses me about this 'refusal to renew' is that, though everything is in my name only, the policy itself is in BOTH my name and my husband's, and they evidently are aware of this since the refusal was addressed to the both of us.
My question...am I being refused because, without a license, I shouldn't even be named on any auto insurance policy right now? Or are they refusing me because they see me as a 'risk' period, and they don't want to assume that risk ever, with or without my name on the policy and with or without my doctor's approval to drive sometime down the road.
Also, if I were to take my name off the policy completely and we were to put the policy in my husband's name alone, might I be able to get around this? Or since the car itself is insured and not so much the driver - my neighbor could drive my car, have an accident, and still be covered under my auto insurance - could the fact that the car is sitting in the newly insured's driveway (my husband's) prevent this, just because I live under the same roof and could potentially drive it? And if that's the case, wouldn't it be the same as refusing someone auto insurance because a 13 year old is living in their home and could potentially take their car keys, drive it, and crash it?
I'm bumming. They gave me info on a 'high risk' insurers, but that has to be expensive.
My license was revoked due to seizures back in May (I think?), so no driver's license for me. My husband, however, does have a valid driver's license.
I have 2 cars.
- One I own. It is registered and titled in my name only.
- The other one I don't own (it is being financed), but the loan for it is in my name only, and it is registered in my name only (though my husband had to sign for me to register it, since I've no driver's license).
What confuses me about this 'refusal to renew' is that, though everything is in my name only, the policy itself is in BOTH my name and my husband's, and they evidently are aware of this since the refusal was addressed to the both of us.
My question...am I being refused because, without a license, I shouldn't even be named on any auto insurance policy right now? Or are they refusing me because they see me as a 'risk' period, and they don't want to assume that risk ever, with or without my name on the policy and with or without my doctor's approval to drive sometime down the road.
Also, if I were to take my name off the policy completely and we were to put the policy in my husband's name alone, might I be able to get around this? Or since the car itself is insured and not so much the driver - my neighbor could drive my car, have an accident, and still be covered under my auto insurance - could the fact that the car is sitting in the newly insured's driveway (my husband's) prevent this, just because I live under the same roof and could potentially drive it? And if that's the case, wouldn't it be the same as refusing someone auto insurance because a 13 year old is living in their home and could potentially take their car keys, drive it, and crash it?
I'm bumming. They gave me info on a 'high risk' insurers, but that has to be expensive.
Last edited:
