so even if a person will NEVER drive they are still being charged for? that's awful! I think of homes with seniors who have voluntarily given up licenses, younger people who have disabilities that preclude them from driving or just younger that opt not to (I believe the stats back a few years ago showed that people under age 25 without licenses had dropped from 80% in the 1980's to 60% currently). I must have a company that does'nt do this b/c nothing happened when my oldest hit any of these ages until I notified them of aquiring a permit/license. with my youngest-he will never drive and is approaching 29 without ever making an impact on our coverage/premiums.
Yes even if a person never drives. At least at that insurance company with the states they were in state law only permitted a handful of states to have what was called a "non-driver's" status. For youth drivers if they just had a permit it would be coded as "permitted" but only for that one term except for that one state that prohibited permitted drivers from being rated. Another status that was newer under a newer product took into account college students, there was away at college with or without a vehicle.
The insurance company's main guideline was "rated or excluded" and the majority of people couldn't be excluded (a registered owner even if located states away for example couldn't be excluded). A few states allowed a spouse to be excluded but that was rare (spouses are considered one entity that's why). There was a status for "surrendered license" that you're talking about but again that is state by state as well as marital status (meaning some states could allow a spouse to be listed as surrendered license others didn't). Disabled is also a code that would vary by state. Basically with them it was all drivers are rated unless they are Y (as permitted by state law some code that prevents them from being rated).
The vast majority of people don't add their kids onto the policy UNTIL they get a DL that's why it's probably not generally talked about what the insurance company and the product the person is under has for rules because people don't often proactively add their children in before they get a permit, even when they get a permit. Many years ago the insurance company I worked for had a "new parent" discount which would incentivize parents to add their children in when they were young.
The documents you get when you first sign up with a company entails what you are supposed to do from disclosure of all drivers to disclosure of all individuals in the household and then the system can code them how the insurance company wants them to be disclosed and not all insurance companies may require you to notify them unless a certain condition is met. I was in underwriting and I non-renewed a lot of policies for unrated exposures as that was in part what my job entailed. The majority were found out because the person was involved in an accident and they wanted the insurance company to cover it. Some were found by accidental disclosure, either by the agent calling up saying "my insureds just told me..." or by the agent's own omission to which I couldn't just ignore legally speaking.
There's a mixture of stuff going on here. There's state law, there's the product the person is under within an insurance company and then there's how an insurance company is filed with the state for compliance reasons. Some states are incredibly strict themselves on their insurance commission where you'll commit perjury if you don't disclose everyone in the household.
And while I know it's like far from our present-day minds back when same-sex marriage wasn't legalized we couldn't rate people as married if they were in a same-sex marriage (this affect the rates usually lowering the rates), then it was a state by state thing where we knew this state legalized it so we could go ahead and change people's status, then after the legalization in 2015 by the Fed government level it could apply to everyone but that's just adding in an extra detail about how things can be very state by state at times.
The insurance company I worked for risk and exposure was one of the main things to them so they were quite often very strict on this. Another insurance company may have something else they are strict on. It's just one of those things you have to know what your particular insurance company is set up as. It's not across the board treated the same.