Admiral now penalize drivers on speeding awareness courses.

[Mr Celine]

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?

If it was so obviously rotten why did you park under it?

 

[growingvegetables]

You see I could go along with that if the Auto insurance industry in the UK wasn't a complete & utter scam ...

Auto insurance companies are SCUM, pure & simple, it's legalised shafting of the motoring public.

Hmm - just wondering if the shafting is quite so one way as you suggest?

1. "one out of every 140 people claiming for a whiplash injury each year."
2. "The number of personal injury claims on Britain's roads last year went up ... 18%, despite a fall in accidents and car damage claims."

 

[cd365]

I think personally that people are making up these injuries to get recompense for how much their insurance will go up even though the accident wasn't their fault!

 

[growingvegetables]

... to get recompense ...

By making everybody else's premiums go up?

Hmm - think I prefer the word "shafting"

 

[GrasB]

What I don't understand is this -
Driver A is stopped at red traffic lights waiting for them to go green
Driver B isn't paying attention to the road & drives into the back of driver A's car.
Driver B's insurance company takes 100% liability & pays for all costs for both parties.
When driver A news the insurance they find they've been levied with an extra 20% hike in premium due to their accident.

Why is this?

 

[400bhp]

What I don't understand is this -
Driver A is stopped at red traffic lights waiting for them to go green
Driver B isn't paying attention to the road & drives into the back of driver A's car.
Driver B's insurance company takes 100% liability & pays for all costs for both parties.
When driver A news the insurance they find they've been levied with an extra 20% hike in premium due to their accident.

Why is this?

20% hike seems a lot. Are you sure it is directly as a result of the accident and also whether the increase in premium was after the settlement?

 

[GrasB]

Certainly on the on-line quotes it was about +20% for a no-fault claim yes this was post settlement.

 

[400bhp]

same company before and after?

 

[GrasB]

We first went through & put all the details in forgetting about the collision. When reviewing we realised the incident wasn't included so went through the process again. Almost all insurance quotes were around +20% for a no fault collision.

 

[400bhp]

I'm not sure the 20% is correct, (other things can be at play such as accumulation risk that insurance companies don't like) but let's assume there is a (marginal) increase in premium.

It is for the answer I alluded to up thread. They see you as a (marginally) greater risk of having an accident. They may classify you with drivers that are (strange as it might seem) perhaps overly cautious. Or it could be for the less obvious, such that you drive on roads with a higher accident risk.

I'm sure you want to say something along the lines of "yes but I...". The key is that the insurance company generally don't look at the "i" but pool you with other drivers they see as exhibiting similar characteristics.

By the way, I checked the above a few years ago with a colleague that comes up with the derivation of insurance premiums.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

I'm in a car park in a Berlingo van, starts to slowly reverse into a parking stop, next thing I know there is a car behind me, I get out & the guy to screaming & shouting at me, the nearside wing, front passenger door & rear passenger door of his car are all caved in. His nearside front wheel is turn hard to the left & is just touching my bumper, so I have not actually got as far as his car. But because I was reversing my insurance company wouldn't argue it, although the guy had been involved in the same accident 2 days earlier, he got paid out £5.5K the car was worth less that £500.

Next thing you know there is a car behind you? You were obviously reversing without looking where you were going. That aside, you were a victim of an insurance fraud and once again the value of the car/claim means little. This doesn't mean that the insurance company are scum. You would have had to pay them 5.5k if you didn't have any insurance, I think you should be grateful.

Completely incorrect, I was reversing off my mirrors, I knew there were children to my offside, I took my eyes from the NS mirror to check both the OS mirror & where the children were by which time he had deliberately driven around the back of me, did I mention the humpty loud reversing alarm on the van? I agree I was a VICTIM of a fraud, which the Insurance company knew about, as I told them & their solicitors & yes it does mean they are SCUM as they perpetuated the fraud.

I certainly wouldn't have had to pay the £5.5K as it would have been thrown out of court, £3K for whiplash, I was doing less than 1 mile an hour. £1.5K for car hire, he had 2 cars on hire at the time, one for each accident, amazingly his 'mate' owned the hire car firm. £700 for the POS Honda Civic of which I caused no damage whatsoever as the only thing I touched was an out turned tyre, he got paid out on that twice as well. Can't remember what the extra £200 was for, as to what it has cost me, so far in excess of £1500 in increased premiums & I had to sell a car as I wasn't insurable for reasonable costs on it.

Previous to this I have driven for over 30 years without EVER having an accident or making a claim, a FULL clean license for any vehicle that moves apart from a tracked vehicle, a member of the Advance Motorcyclists, so please don't tell me I don't know how to drive. This was over 3 years ago & I bet you can tell I am still angry about it, I was the VICTIM yet got screwed royally but the scum insurance company.

Sorry OP but I think my views on why Admiral are trying to screw over their customers is clearly evident, they don't give a toss about customers, all that matters is the bottom line,

And BREATHE...............Rant over.........

Alan...

 

[Nortones2]

Amazing that the Ins Co rolled over on that. But maybe not: http://www.roadhawk.co.uk/blog/crash-for-cash-terrorism-links/

Headline: "Crash for cash suspects killed in Drone Strike"

There is a small industry involved in this fraud, some of which might well be linked to other circles! And sometimes there is a happy ending as above. But only if the police investigate. Something they aren't all alert to, whether terrorists are involved or not. Just yer ordinary criminal families.

 

[cloggsy]

My question is, how will insurance companies know if you have been on a 'speed awareness course' if you don't declare it? The Police won't issue this information to insurers would they? I thought the whole point for paying to go on a speed awareness course was to negate the points going onto your license?

 

[Deleted member 26715]

My question is, how will insurance companies know if you have been on a 'speed awareness course' if you don't declare it? The Police won't issue this information to insurers would they? I thought the whole point for paying to go on a speed awareness course was to negate the points going onto your license?

Possibly a subtle rewording of the application form, which if you say 'no' to invalidates your insurance.

Alan...

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Can't remember what the extra £200 was for, as to what it has cost me, so far in excess of £1500 in increased premiums & I had to sell a car as I wasn't insurable for reasonable costs on it.

An accident three years ago has cost you an avg of £500 pa in increased premiums. Have I understood that correctly?

I take it you weren't, and aren't, driving a group A car then?