Admiral now penalize drivers on speeding awareness courses.

[glasgowcyclist]

Sorry GC, I'm struggling to see the particular point that you were discussing (lost somewhere in the thread I guess). Can you show me the post/point?

Sure, it started with subaqua's post #57 on page 3 and subsequent replies from Paul99.

GC

 

[400bhp]

This?

so imagine my surprise when my premiums went up after a tree fell on my car , whilst i wasn't even in the same town as the car. apparently in insurance eyes once something happens to you its likely to happen again and again. this is the same insurance company being talked anout in this thread. who don't really seem to be doing much to claim back the loss from the Council who own the tree. much easier to get any money back from your customers than do any work. am so glad that i got rid of my car now.

In isolation, it would be hard to accept yes.

However, it isn't clear whether the premium went up directly as a result of this or whether something else was at play (increased insurance premiums across the board for example)?

 

[Recycle]

Ah. Of course - Munich Re has 25% of Admiral's risk, doesn't it? But outside special deals like that, most reinsurers only see a tiny proportion of the biggest claims.

Don't know, I no longer work for them & wouldn't have a breakdown of their book of business anyway. I'm an IT geek who happens to have worked for a insurance company, not an insurance man.

In terms of claims, a reinsurer would see whatever share of claims it has agreed to re-insure. If you know anything about reinsurance you will know that there are many ways of slicing and dicing risk.

 

[subaqua]

The likelihood of it happening again remains exactly the same if you keep parking near trees.

If you win the lottery you have defied odds of 13,983,815/1. If you buy a ticket the following week the odds are exactly the same.

if the tree that fell on it is no longer there , how can that tree fall on it? and once you have a tree fall on you , you generally don't park under trees again. because you get bent over by insurance companies. as i said so glad i sold my car

 

[subaqua]

This?


In isolation, it would be hard to accept yes.

However, it isn't clear whether the premium went up directly as a result of this or whether something else was at play (increased insurance premiums across the board for example)?

the tree fall was around 8 hours before new policy kicked in. this was a friday, i had a letter on the Monday saying premium would be increasing from my renewal quote as i had made a claim. it was "only £78" but thats still a pi55take. I have had no communication from them in chasing the council for the excess i had to pay.

i do love the way insurance companies determine risk.

 

[400bhp]

the tree fall was around 8 hours before new policy kicked in. this was a friday, i had a letter on the Monday saying premium would be increasing from my renewal quote as i had made a claim. it was "only £78" but thats still a pi55take. I have had no communication from them in chasing the council for the excess i had to pay.

i do love the way insurance companies determine risk.

Then they hadn't had a chance to ascertain the claim then? They increased it as you had lost some of a NCD? Without knowing the whole facts it's difficult to know the precise reasons why.

And why do you "love the way insurance companies determine risk"? You know a better way then.

 

[400bhp]

if the tree that fell on it is no longer there , how can that tree fall on it? and once you have a tree fall on you , you generally don't park under trees again. because you get bent over by insurance companies. as i said so glad i sold my car

He said parking near trees, not that particular tree. If you don't generally park under trees then there is no risk of a tree falling on you, however if you do, the risk is as it was before the other tree fell on you.

 

[Mr Celine]

the tree fall was around 8 hours before new policy kicked in. this was a friday, i had a letter on the Monday saying premium would be increasing from my renewal quote as i had made a claim. it was "only £78" but thats still a pi55take. I have had no communication from them in chasing the council for the excess i had to pay.

i do love the way insurance companies determine risk.

Are you perhaps interpreting a no claim discount as a no blame discount?

And out of interest, why is a tree falling on your car the council's fault?

 

[subaqua]

Then they hadn't had a chance to ascertain the claim then? They increased it as you had lost some of a NCD? Without knowing the whole facts it's difficult to know the precise reasons why.

And why do you "love the way insurance companies determine risk"? You know a better way then.

protected NCD.

nope but you can't get a straight answer from them if you do ask how they calculate the risk.

Admiral are a bunch of http://www.amazon.co.uk/Forever-Odd...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1353359468&sr=1-1

 

[subaqua]

Are you perhaps interpreting a no claim discount as a no blame discount?

And out of interest, why is a tree falling on your car the council's fault?

and i know the difference between no blame and no claim. Protected NCD here. although now i am out of the car use merry go round if i start again it will be back to zero like when i came out of the company car scheme to have my own vehicle- the insurance companies decided that despite me never claiming , not having any incidents that i was to start from scratch with NCD.
Shystrers is too nice a term for insurance companies.
because it was rotten to the core, in excess of 3 years counting remaining growth rings and councils have a duty of care to carry out tree inspections regularly. want to see some pictures?

 

[subaqua]

He said parking near trees, not that particular tree. If you don't generally park under trees then there is no risk of a tree falling on you, however if you do, the risk is as it was before the other tree fell on you.

so why should the policy cost go up if the risk is the same ?

 

[Paul99]

Tha was crappy timing and unfortunately meant that you were not claim free so you have to accept that the quote you received originally was on the basis that you were claim free.

Nobody likes having to buy insurance. Myself included, especially car insurance as it is so expensive. Compared to the amount you pay for say buildings insurance it is almost a rip off. But you are most likely to make a claim on car insurance more than anything else in life as there are so many factors that have to be taken in to account, including other road users.

Peoples perceptions of insurers is bad because when you don't make a claim it seems like money down the drain, and when you do have to make a claim it's because something bad has happened to you or your property and you are usually not looking at the world with a normal level head.

I don't make out insurance to be some kind of public service as was mentioned earlier. If you have to make a large claim it's often the best money you have ever spent, and compared to having to fork out to replace a car or rebuild a house it's a bargain.

 

[400bhp]

protected NCD.

nope but you can't get a straight answer from them if you do ask how they calculate the risk.

Yes that can be annoying.

Putting banking to one side, the finance industry doesn't help itself sometimes, particularly explaining things clearly. I'm one of them [finance industry workers] and it bloody frustrates me. One of the issues is because it has a lot of people in the industry that like detail and whose job it is to examine detail, whereas the general populace don't [like or crave detail].

 

[400bhp]

so why should the policy cost go up if the risk is the same ?

They might be assuming that you are more likely to claim for a number of reasons. For example you exhibit " moral hazard " characteristics, i.e. you are a person whose characteristics mean you would claim where others wouldn't for example, or for example you are more careless where you park etc etc. Please don't think I am personally castigating you as exhibiting those characterists, it's just that an insurer will group you with other people.

Or it might be that all premiums have increased, or it could be that your particular geodemographic profile has seen an increas or change of risk. etc etc etc.

 

[subaqua]

Yes that can be annoying.

Putting banking to one side, the finance industry doesn't help itself sometimes, particularly explaining things clearly. I'm one of them [finance industry workers] and it bloody frustrates me. One of the issues is because it has a lot of people in the industry that like detail and whose job it is to examine detail, whereas the general populace don't [like or crave detail].

I love detail, people say the devil is in the detail but DI Sam Tyler in Life on Mars had it right- the god is in the detail.
I used small print detail against Admiral to ensure they chased the replacemenmt parts properly. they were going to instruct the repairers to cancel the order if it was delayed more than 8 weeks. luckily i had already had an offer in writing in the value of the vehicle, so i took it in its incomplete repaired state to the same dealer and got a new quote . it was rightly significantly less. i asked admiral how much i would receive in leiu of repair and the figure was a lot less than the difference in quotes. i provided them the info and asked if the ombusdsman would deem it a fair contract that i was left out of pocket. they changed minds very quickly on how long to wait for parts.