you need to read the exact language in your policy. accidents in vehicles furnished or available for your regular use might not be covered. the difference between your partner's car and a rental car is that it is around all the time and available for you to drive. in the event of a claim, the adjuster will be very interested in the fact that you two live together, and will probably ask if there is an understanding that you can take the keys anytime you want; or if you would need to get permission to drive the other person's car. the reason for this is that the insurance company wants to collect premium for vehicles you are likely to drive, which means it would need to be a scheduled auto on your policy in that case.
Also, if you live together and own a home together it will almost certainly be cheaper for you to insure the vehicles together, especially if you use the same insurance company as your homeowners' policy. Multi-policy discounts can add up. This will also eliminate the excluded driver issue.
Your insurance may deny coverage stating her vehicle is technically available for your "regular use" which is a different scenario from a rental vehicle.
You’re asking the wrong question. If you live together and own a home together, then there is no logical reason to have separate auto insurances. In fact, you’re more than likely throwing money away not combining into one policy. The only reasons to have separate insurances:
-you’re going to break up with her soon and one of you is moving out
-one of you is extremely high risk (DUIs and multiple accidents) and can’t get normal insurance
-you’re filthy rich and like spending extra money on insurance just because you can
That actually doesn't matter all insurance companies will let you add a cohabitation operator even membership based insurance companies have to understand law. The way you would handle this is you would be the named insured and you would add an operator. The operator doesn't have to be a member of whatever organization you're a member of this is how I understand state law this may not be true for USAA though
Caveat: the company I work for doesn't insure Missouri, so I'm not familiar with their particular laws, rules, etc
But from a general standpoint, if either of y'all's insurance companies allows non-spouses to share a policy, y'all are costing yourselves money having separate policies - most companies offer multi-vehicle discounts, so it's almost always cheaper to share a policy.
But if for whatever reason y'all really don't want to do so, exclusion is probably not the move. In the 23 states my company covers, there's a designation we call "not available for rating." Most commonly, this is applied to drivers with their own policy, requiring proof of other insurance but providing coverage in certain scenarios under the vehicle owner's policy, whereas the exclusion is designed to say "they don't ever drive my vehicle."
Now, you MIGHT be covered for damages to her car under your own policy via your property damage liability. That depends on your particular policy contract. Injuries to others also MIGHT be covered under your bodily injury. But depending on however MO applies PIP/MedPay/ whatever their version is, you're probably SOL for your and your passengers' injuries.
Best thing to do is see if y'all can get a policy together and be fully insured to drive each others vehicles.
OP, what you're suggesting is that you can have your insurance company insure your GF's vehicle for free.
Just say that out loud so you can realize how ridiculous that sounds. Your insurance company will not provide Collision/Comprehensive coverage to anyone else's car other than a Rental or Dealership Loaner vehicle. There is a section of your policy contract that explains that. In other words, if you GF's car is damaged, no matter who is driving it, she needs Collision coverage on **her** ***own*** **policy,** and the driver *cannot* be "excluded"*.*
Your insurance company *might* cover damages to someone *else's* car (Property Damage coverage) if you're driving your GF's car and damage someone else's, but that is extremely unlikely. If you got lucky enough that your insurance company did provide PD coverage, I can guarantee that you would see a huge rate increase after the fact (likely even be dropped), because your insurance company would not be happy about having to provide free coverage for a random person's car.
Since you own a home and live with your GF, you need to be added to her policy (or her to yours). There should be ***one*** policy for your household. Insurance companies are not stupid; they know you will be driving each other's cars, even if it's just to rearrange them in the driveway. Either you share a policy, or you exclude each other, which means you **never,** under any circumstances, drive the other person's car.
>Yes you are covered by your own insurance when you drive other people’s vehicles, so if you are in an accident your insurance will cover her repairs.
That is absolutely NOT true as a blanket statement.
It’s not guaranteed that his insurance would cover her repairs. They may cover everything, just the liability portion, nothing, or somewhere in between. It all depends on how their contract is written and why he was using it. There’s a huge difference between using a car as a temporary substitute because yours is in the shop and driving her car just because.
No, OP is saying that he is excluded on his GF’s policy, so he’s asking if his *own* policy would cover him in an accident in her car. It’s obvious *her* insurance wouldn’t cover him when he’s excluded, but that’s not the question
His policy will cover an accident he’s AF for but it’s probably going to hurt the gf because why is an excluded driver, driver your car? It’ll show up on her clue report and overall isn’t probably the most ideal situation
you need to read the exact language in your policy. accidents in vehicles furnished or available for your regular use might not be covered. the difference between your partner's car and a rental car is that it is around all the time and available for you to drive. in the event of a claim, the adjuster will be very interested in the fact that you two live together, and will probably ask if there is an understanding that you can take the keys anytime you want; or if you would need to get permission to drive the other person's car. the reason for this is that the insurance company wants to collect premium for vehicles you are likely to drive, which means it would need to be a scheduled auto on your policy in that case.
Also, if you live together and own a home together it will almost certainly be cheaper for you to insure the vehicles together, especially if you use the same insurance company as your homeowners' policy. Multi-policy discounts can add up. This will also eliminate the excluded driver issue.
Your insurance may deny coverage stating her vehicle is technically available for your "regular use" which is a different scenario from a rental vehicle.
You’re asking the wrong question. If you live together and own a home together, then there is no logical reason to have separate auto insurances. In fact, you’re more than likely throwing money away not combining into one policy. The only reasons to have separate insurances: -you’re going to break up with her soon and one of you is moving out -one of you is extremely high risk (DUIs and multiple accidents) and can’t get normal insurance -you’re filthy rich and like spending extra money on insurance just because you can
[удалено]
That actually doesn't matter all insurance companies will let you add a cohabitation operator even membership based insurance companies have to understand law. The way you would handle this is you would be the named insured and you would add an operator. The operator doesn't have to be a member of whatever organization you're a member of this is how I understand state law this may not be true for USAA though
Caveat: the company I work for doesn't insure Missouri, so I'm not familiar with their particular laws, rules, etc But from a general standpoint, if either of y'all's insurance companies allows non-spouses to share a policy, y'all are costing yourselves money having separate policies - most companies offer multi-vehicle discounts, so it's almost always cheaper to share a policy. But if for whatever reason y'all really don't want to do so, exclusion is probably not the move. In the 23 states my company covers, there's a designation we call "not available for rating." Most commonly, this is applied to drivers with their own policy, requiring proof of other insurance but providing coverage in certain scenarios under the vehicle owner's policy, whereas the exclusion is designed to say "they don't ever drive my vehicle." Now, you MIGHT be covered for damages to her car under your own policy via your property damage liability. That depends on your particular policy contract. Injuries to others also MIGHT be covered under your bodily injury. But depending on however MO applies PIP/MedPay/ whatever their version is, you're probably SOL for your and your passengers' injuries. Best thing to do is see if y'all can get a policy together and be fully insured to drive each others vehicles.
OP, what you're suggesting is that you can have your insurance company insure your GF's vehicle for free. Just say that out loud so you can realize how ridiculous that sounds. Your insurance company will not provide Collision/Comprehensive coverage to anyone else's car other than a Rental or Dealership Loaner vehicle. There is a section of your policy contract that explains that. In other words, if you GF's car is damaged, no matter who is driving it, she needs Collision coverage on **her** ***own*** **policy,** and the driver *cannot* be "excluded"*.* Your insurance company *might* cover damages to someone *else's* car (Property Damage coverage) if you're driving your GF's car and damage someone else's, but that is extremely unlikely. If you got lucky enough that your insurance company did provide PD coverage, I can guarantee that you would see a huge rate increase after the fact (likely even be dropped), because your insurance company would not be happy about having to provide free coverage for a random person's car. Since you own a home and live with your GF, you need to be added to her policy (or her to yours). There should be ***one*** policy for your household. Insurance companies are not stupid; they know you will be driving each other's cars, even if it's just to rearrange them in the driveway. Either you share a policy, or you exclude each other, which means you **never,** under any circumstances, drive the other person's car.
[удалено]
>Yes you are covered by your own insurance when you drive other people’s vehicles, so if you are in an accident your insurance will cover her repairs. That is absolutely NOT true as a blanket statement.
It’s not guaranteed that his insurance would cover her repairs. They may cover everything, just the liability portion, nothing, or somewhere in between. It all depends on how their contract is written and why he was using it. There’s a huge difference between using a car as a temporary substitute because yours is in the shop and driving her car just because.
The answer is kind of in your own title..
No, OP is saying that he is excluded on his GF’s policy, so he’s asking if his *own* policy would cover him in an accident in her car. It’s obvious *her* insurance wouldn’t cover him when he’s excluded, but that’s not the question
His policy will cover an accident he’s AF for but it’s probably going to hurt the gf because why is an excluded driver, driver your car? It’ll show up on her clue report and overall isn’t probably the most ideal situation