I can forsee some issues with this… A lot of commercial auto policies (especially those with comp & collision) have a named driver endorsement. A blanket ban on this may cause some premium increases.
Why prohibit Named Driver policies? In some states, a licensed driver does not own a vehicle and there is no other way to secure coverage, which may be required to maintain a valid driver’s license. The fact that the policy only covers a specific individual should not be a problem. Any one that needs such coverage would purchase his/her own policy. And why ban Driver Exclusions? How else do you eliminate uninsurable drivers?
If the person does not own a vehicle then, they can get a non-owners policy. The problem with named driver policies has been the lack of disclosure. I have a number of customers / ex-customers calling me asking for advice when their new auto carrier is denying a claim caused by a driver not named on their new policy with the new carrier they went with when they dropped the standard auto policy I had them written on. They assumed their new policy had the same coverage conditions as the policy I had on them but, nobody explained the difference when they saved a few dollars to change carriers and policies. GEICO has been the most frequent that I’ve dealt with. Progressive went to a named driver personal policy for all renewals and new business after 11/5/2014.
There’s no problem issuing a Named Driver policy if the insured KNOWS it’s a Named Driver policy. However, rarely is an auto owner the only person who EVER drives the vehicle. This could open up a plethora of uninsured motorists claims and E&O claims on the part of the agent for selling it. It’s not worth it.
I can forsee some issues with this… A lot of commercial auto policies (especially those with comp & collision) have a named driver endorsement. A blanket ban on this may cause some premium increases.
Why prohibit Named Driver policies? In some states, a licensed driver does not own a vehicle and there is no other way to secure coverage, which may be required to maintain a valid driver’s license. The fact that the policy only covers a specific individual should not be a problem. Any one that needs such coverage would purchase his/her own policy. And why ban Driver Exclusions? How else do you eliminate uninsurable drivers?
If the person does not own a vehicle then, they can get a non-owners policy. The problem with named driver policies has been the lack of disclosure. I have a number of customers / ex-customers calling me asking for advice when their new auto carrier is denying a claim caused by a driver not named on their new policy with the new carrier they went with when they dropped the standard auto policy I had them written on. They assumed their new policy had the same coverage conditions as the policy I had on them but, nobody explained the difference when they saved a few dollars to change carriers and policies. GEICO has been the most frequent that I’ve dealt with. Progressive went to a named driver personal policy for all renewals and new business after 11/5/2014.
There’s no problem issuing a Named Driver policy if the insured KNOWS it’s a Named Driver policy. However, rarely is an auto owner the only person who EVER drives the vehicle. This could open up a plethora of uninsured motorists claims and E&O claims on the part of the agent for selling it. It’s not worth it.