FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > rip off car insurance
rip off car insurance
Jump to: Newest in thread
They really should change the laws I. this country..
Made it illegal not to have insurance n basically said to insurance companies charge what you want...
Case of wtf
I feel for the 17 year who have to pay 5 granf for a bangor |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They really should change the laws I. this country..
Made it illegal not to have insurance n basically said to insurance companies charge what you want...
Case of wtf
I feel for the 17 year who have to pay 5
granf for a bangor"
Welcome to the wonderful world of statistics. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I take the OP's point, to a point. There is competition in the market to drive (sic) prices down, and it is a risk based business based on accident stats. Younger people have more accidents, ergo, their premiums are higher.
What I do think is wrong, is that they aren't allowed to price on gender. whilst women have 3-5 times more accidents per mile than men, they drive a lot less and have fewer accidents per year, thus costing insurers less. I think they should be allowed to price premiums accordingly.
Price comparison websites are great - been using them for over 10 years. All my details stored, just increase the no-claims figure by 1 each year and press the button to get best prices for my 3 vehicles without having to phone around.
This year I've saved in total around £200 off the renewal prices from existing insurers, even though they were all the cheapest last year.
(Him) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I take the OP's point, to a point. There is competition in the market to drive (sic) prices down, and it is a risk based business based on accident stats. Younger people have more accidents, ergo, their premiums are higher.
What I do think is wrong, is that they aren't allowed to price on gender. whilst women have 3-5 times more accidents per mile than men, they drive a lot less and have fewer accidents per year, thus costing insurers less. I think they should be allowed to price premiums accordingly.
Price comparison websites are great - been using them for over 10 years. All my details stored, just increase the no-claims figure by 1 each year and press the button to get best prices for my 3 vehicles without having to phone around.
This year I've saved in total around £200 off the renewal prices from existing insurers, even though they were all the cheapest last year.
(Him)"
Agree with most apart from charging women less. I've driven for 23 years and no accident or claim yet almost every year my renewal is priced higher?
I know some terrible male and female drivers.. don't think it's fair to compare everyone or charge by average.
Quick phone call and it's reduced but always seems a waste of time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Never settle with your renewal and remember call centre rep aren't all expert in the insurence field and mostly work to a script. Therefore is already mapped our if you can get a renewal loyalty discount so don't waste your time trying to negotiate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Ha that's very expensive but they won't be paying that....that's just the insurer saying "we don't want to insure you" , my old mini was £1300 for my first year at 17... What's the cheapest quote? Depends on the "banger" too, they should be looking to buy an old corsa or polo or something like that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The price is not based on the damage to their own car so its "banger" status is almost irrelevant. It is the damage they can do to others.
New drivers have accidents so they are bad risks. To use a sexual analogy they have a 1:3 chance of getting pregnant in the first year.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I take the OP's point, to a point. There is competition in the market to drive (sic) prices down, and it is a risk based business based on accident stats. Younger people have more accidents, ergo, their premiums are higher.
What I do think is wrong, is that they aren't allowed to price on gender. whilst women have 3-5 times more accidents per mile than men, they drive a lot less and have fewer accidents per year, thus costing insurers less. I think they should be allowed to price premiums accordingly.
Price comparison websites are great - been using them for over 10 years. All my details stored, just increase the no-claims figure by 1 each year and press the button to get best prices for my 3 vehicles without having to phone around.
This year I've saved in total around £200 off the renewal prices from existing insurers, even though they were all the cheapest last year.
(Him)"
I've always used price comparison websites and only stayed with the same insurance company when I had the golf convertible as it was an import but the women only insurance companies have always been much more expensive than regular insurance companies and quoted me over £300 for a 2 ltr vectra fully comp so I went with £150 instead  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
As others have said we're paying for others for example the drivers who feel they don't need insurance but still crash into others or the drivers who feel the speed your doing isn't fast enough so drive up your arse and fail to break in time. And as for gender pricing how can it be fair when people are campaigning for equal rights/pay but then think it's fair that women pay less then men??
I think there should be a law in place that restricts the type of vehicle your allowed to drive for the first few years of driving i.e. no more than a 1.1 until you click up enough experience. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
If you're in a banger you're actually going to pay more-old cars don't have the safety features newer cars do. A few years ago I went up from a supermini to a family sized hatchback, thinking it would cost me a fortune more in insurance. The fam size hatch was 5 years newer...my insurance came DOWN to under £300 a year-and that was living in central London. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As others have said we're paying for others for example the drivers who feel they don't need insurance but still crash into others or the drivers who feel the speed your doing isn't fast enough so drive up your arse and fail to break in time. And as for gender pricing how can it be fair when people are campaigning for equal rights/pay but then think it's fair that women pay less then men??
I think there should be a law in place that restricts the type of vehicle your allowed to drive for the first few years of driving i.e. no more than a 1.1 until you click up enough experience. "
I'm the male. But I think insurance companies should be free to base premiums on the level of risk. They do it for age/occupation/driving history, so why not gender. As stated above, women have fewer accidents per year (but not per mile), so they cost the insurers less and present less risk. It's daft pc rules that don't allow them to exercise what is plain common business sense, and in fact penalise them for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The two main issues are vehicle type/power and the fact that the UK Insurance industry continue to break EU rules in No Claims.
Bikers have to restrict power/capacity unless taking an extended test so the same should go for car drivers. Except there is no way any elected official is going to risk upsetting the voters who see driving as a "right" rather than a privilege.
Insurers blatantly ignore the ruling on No Claims - only applying it to the first vehicle you insure.
The fact the DRIVER has earned the No Claims they ignore. The fact the driver can only drive/ride ONE vehicle at a time is ignored because they can charge far more by restricting the No Claims to ONE vehicle.
There is currently a case in court about this which could tear the industry apart but it's being fought by a lot of very, very high priced legal a paid for by the insurers so it's very likely it will get paid off and made to go away  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The two main issues are vehicle type/power and the fact that the UK Insurance industry continue to break EU rules in No Claims.
Bikers have to restrict power/capacity unless taking an extended test so the same should go for car drivers. Except there is no way any elected official is going to risk upsetting the voters who see driving as a "right" rather than a privilege.
Insurers blatantly ignore the ruling on No Claims - only applying it to the first vehicle you insure.
The fact the DRIVER has earned the No Claims they ignore. The fact the driver can only drive/ride ONE vehicle at a time is ignored because they can charge far more by restricting the No Claims to ONE vehicle.
There is currently a case in court about this which could tear the industry apart but it's being fought by a lot of very, very high priced legal a paid for by the insurers so it's very likely it will get paid off and made to go away "
Agree totally.
I have always had 2 cars insured in my name, with me as the only driver, so I have 2 separate insurance timelines with 2 separate no claims bonuses.
The most odious is VED. I have to pay twice even though I can only drive one vehicle at a time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bi HaiveMan
over a year ago
Forum Mod Cheeseville, Somerset |
"Never settle with your renewal and remember call centre rep aren't all expert in the insurence field and mostly work to a script. Therefore is already mapped our if you can get a renewal loyalty discount so don't waste your time trying to negotiate. "
Sorry - wrong. Always negotiate.
Insurance companies know a certain percentage of customers will just accept a renewal quote, due to apathy, brand loyalty or just because they forgot to shop around. They're also aware that a high percentage will use price comparison sites and just choose the cheapest option with the added bonus of a free meerkat or robot toy. Therefore their targets for new business are higher than for retention and as such more discounts and deals are available for new customers as opposed to existing.
When your renewal is due try and get an online quote from your existing provider as a 'new' customer. It'll probably be between 10-20% cheaper than your renewal quote.
And if you're not happy with your renewal then haggle and threaten to go elsewhere. It's always worth negotiating.
A |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
In my experience I've actually found that older cars cost more to insure
I have a friend who has a rover 25,2002 paying £2300 and a friend who has a 2014 fiesta paying £1500 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *at69driveMan
over a year ago
Wisbech and A47 corridor |
"They really should change the laws I. this country..
Made it illegal not to have insurance n basically said to insurance companies charge what you want...
Case of wtf
I feel for the 17 year who have to pay 5 granf for a bangor"
. I think you will find that insurance companies pay out at least at much as they collect in premiums , so hardly a rip off . If you wish to seek blaim for high premiums , blame both the no win no fee solicitors and those bad drivers who crash. Most accidents are avoidable . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My husband found getting a family car rather than an old 'banger' was a hell of alot cheaper to insure.
avoiding typical boy racer cars made a huge difference.
We went from paying close to 100 a month with nothing extra to less than 50 including breakdown by buying a better car.
3rd party is also alot more than going fully comp.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The upsurge in whiplash and other exaggerated injury claims forced up insurance costs with new drivers being the ones hit. Were they to spread these costs across all drivers then all our policies would go up. As someone who hasn't had a fault accident (either on a bike and in a car) I'm not paying for the high risk drivers or injury fakers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
