Car insurance quotes !!

[Sara_H]

Also, why does your insurance quote go up if you're the victim of an accident that is 100% not your fault?

My car was crashed into once whilst parked outside my house, I was five miles away shopping in town. My premiums went up. Why?

 

[Lee_M]

Also, why does your insurance quote go up if you're the victim of an accident that is 100% not your fault?

My car was crashed into once whilst parked outside my house, I was five miles away shopping in town. My premiums went up. Why?

they just dont like you

seriously it could be any numbner of things, it might not even be related to the crash at all, also if your claim is still outstanding it can effect your premium - it shouldn't but they hedge their bets.

Its not perfect, but then I have a degree in maths and physics and I'm not clever enough to understand their actuarial tables - so not sure I could do better.

 

[Sara_H]

they just dont like you

seriously it could be any numbner of things, it might not even be related to the crash at all, also if your claim is still outstanding it can effect your premium - it shouldn't but they hedge their bets.

Its not perfect, but then I have a degree in maths and physics and I'm not clever enough to understand their actuarial tables - so not sure I could do better.

They specifically said it was because of the claim, I presented a higher risk! Of course, I changed companies.

Funny thing when my last car was written off 15 months ago. The insurance company had made a massive cock up and cancelled my cover five days befor my accident. At first they were adamant that they wouldn't pay put etc, I remember the moment on the phone when the bloke suddenly realised it WAS their mistake. I've never seen an attitude change more abruptly, and the first offer they made on my car was higher than the price I'd have paid to buy it from a dealer. Trying to keep me sweet I think - but not before they'd put me through several days of hell, and I'd been threatened with arrest etc etc.

 

[Lee_M]

They specifically said it was because of the claim, I presented a higher risk! Of course, I changed companies.

Funny thing when my last car was written off 15 months ago. The insurance company had made a massive cock up and cancelled my cover five days befor my accident. At first they were adamant that they wouldn't pay put etc, I remember the moment on the phone when the bloke suddenly realised it WAS their mistake. I've never seen an attitude change more abruptly, and the first offer they made on my car was higher than the price I'd have paid to buy it from a dealer. Trying to keep me sweet I think - but not before they'd put me through several days of hell, and I'd been threatened with arrest etc etc.

ouch, glad you got it sorted, wouldnt like that

 

[Crankarm]

yebbut as I tried to explain earlier it isnt that simple. They are generally making a loss or close to break even, so offering a price is one thing, reducing it when you threaten to leave brings a whole set of alternates into view - ie cost of servicing current client as opposed to finding a new one. Until you say you're leaving that doesn't become relevant

Just because they knock £100 off doesnt mean they had that much profit from the original quote - far from it in the majority of cases. That's why insurance industry is in such a sorry state - it isnt the money grabbing industry that you all seem to think it is.

Dont get me started on investment banking however

Errr ........ no. If a policy holder is a low risk has not made a claim in 25 years has always renewed they are viewed by insurers, banks, etc as cash cows, easy ways to make cash which indirectly financially penalises these policy holders who tend to be the older generation who may be more trusting than younger people, mistakenly believing their insurer may be giving them the best renewal premium when in reality they are being shafted. Sorry but I don't buy your sob story for insurance industry. Insurers are just as greedy and ruthless as bankers. If they think they can get away with charging a higher premium and it will be accepted then they will do so. Without people who are relatively low risks paying these inflated premiums then the insurance industry is up sh1t creek. The trick is not to be one of them if you are a low risk. Inertia or old style loyalty cost you £££££. Unfrotunately shopping around at renewal time has become a necessary evil. I got fully comp car insurance one year with Aviva for £40 with £200 excess using cash back sites which did eventually pay out. Result. On renewal Aviva wanted £265, so I left and went back to a previous insurer who quoted far far less.

Anyway who ever you insure with DON'T INSURE WITH CHURCHILL as the b*****ds are trying to wriggle out of paying damages to a cyclist who they say wasn't wearing hi-viz clothing when their insured knocked them down.

 

[Lee_M]

Errr ........ no. If a policy holder is a low risk has not made a claim in 25 years has always renewed they are viewed by insurers, banks, etc as cash cows, easy ways to make cash which indirectly financially penalises these policy holders who tend to be the older generation who may be more trusting than younger people, mistakenly believing their insurer may be giving them the best renewal premium when in reality they are being shafted. Sorry but I don't buy your sob story for insurance industry. Insurers are just as greedy and ruthless as bankers. If they think they can get away with charging a higher premium and it will be accepted then they will do so. Without people who are relatively low risks paying these inflated premiums then the insurance industry is up sh1t creek. The trick is not to be one of them if you are a low risk. Inertia or old style loyalty cost you £££££. Unfrotunately shopping around at renewal time has become a necessary evil. I got fully comp car insurance one year with Aviva for £40 with £200 excess using cash back sites which did eventually pay out. Result. On renewal Aviva wanted £265, so I left and went back to a previous insurer who quoted far far less.

Do you actually have any facts to base your comments on or is it all diatribe and conspiracy theory ?

I 've tried to explain but in your mind they are ruthless bastards trying to screw little old ladies, and nothing I say , nor facts I offer, will will change that so I may as well give up.

As it happens though the industry is up shoot creek already, but dont come crying on here when you cant get any competition in insurance because all the players have withdrawn from the market

 

[Paul99]

The future of car insurance lies with the 'black box' insurers. It is inevitable that all cars will have to have them fitted one day, and then insurance premiums can be fixed according to your driving style. Accident investigation, and the problem of deciding whose fault the accident is, will then be gone.

All those 'safe' drivers who have never claimed in '25 years' are in for one hell of a shock when they realise what shite drivers they are.

 

[Crankarm]

Do you actually have any facts to base your comments on or is it all diatribe and conspiracy theory ?

I 've tried to explain but in your mind they are ruthless b******s trying to screw little old ladies, and nothing I say , nor facts I offer, will will change that so I may as well give up.

As it happens though the industry is up s*** creek already, but dont come crying on here when you cant get any competition in insurance because all the players have withdrawn from the market

Why is it up sh1tcreek as you put it?

Certainly not as a result of the vulnerable or too trusting who automatically renew paying grossly inflated premiums as described above.

How about but not limited to crash for cash, whiplash, referral fees, fraudulent and inflated claims, top knobs in the insurance industry who have been awarding themselves bumper pay packets which get nowhere near as much coverage as the outrageous payouts the bankers have trousered. Follow the money Lee_M, follow the money.

 

[Lee_M]

Why is it up sh1tcreek as you put it?

Certainly not as a result of the vulnerable or too trusting who automatically renew paying grossly inflated premiums as described above.

How about but not limited to crash for cash, whiplash, referral fees, fraudulent and inflated claims, top knobs in the insurance industry who have been awarding themselves bumper pay packets which get nowhere near as much coverage as the outrageous payouts the bankers have trousered. Follow the money Lee_M, follow the money.

if you're really interested read my other emails.

Its up sh1t creek because it costs more to support a policy than the premium from that policy.
That is down to a whole host of things - incompetence, legacy IT systems, poor quality actuarial and pricing systems, an inability of the industry to move with the times, as well as all the fraud etc etc etc.

despite what you keep implying I am not an apologist for insurance, I see how shoot it really is, and I've seen how it could be fixed.

But that doesnt alter two facts:

i) personal insurance in this country is generally kept afloat becuase of the profits made in commercial insurance - this isnt sustainable
ii) premiums themselves are unsustainably low given where the industry is at the moment.

You might think they are too high, but you havent provided any evidence to back that up why they are "grossly inflated"
You insist its all part of a big conspiracy to defraud little old ladies, whereas prices for people that dont move are high due to inertia and not due to some conspiracy, and prices are set by what the market can sustain - exaclty the same as the price for a bike, push it too high dont get any business, price it too low, go out of business

What do you suggest to a CEO? lower all the prices, get 100% of the market, go bust the following year?

 

[Lee_M]

[QUOTE 2371862, member: 9609"]So how does your equation explain this;

All with Barclays Home Insurance

2008 - 167.99
2009 - 205.00
2010 - 237.95

so, not happy with the increase to £237, I go online and search for other quotes. I find that Barclays, are now offering me as a new customer £151.29. So I phone up the renewals line and explain the discrepancies. They immediately say, sorry about that sir and charge me the lower amount. No change in policy, or values or anything, policy number even remains the same.
Following year they pump it back up to nearly £200. So I jump ship and now with Legal & General my premiums have went £119 then £145. I guess this year will be £180, so I will need to jump ship again.

I believe my neighbour who never bothers changing, and has a similar house is paying about £450

Now all this tempting people in with low offers then making big profits out of the unwary suits me just fine. I'm sure my efforts ensure I am paying below market value. But something as important as insurance, something like all of us need, should not be run as a street market where it is 'buyer beware'.[/quote]

I really don't understand why it's all so difficult for you all. Do you really think every insurance company is running a conspiracy to just up your premium to piss you off?

Actually don't answer that I know the answer.

I can't answer anymore clearly - its down to how they operate, where the prices are automatically generated, and how new and old customers fit into process.

I'm not justifying it, I'm just saying it's not a conspiracy


I'm bored of trying to explain to people who have their fingers in their ears going "la la la not listening", so feel free to still insist its a conspiracy to murder your granny if that makes you feel better

 

[MacB]

In your opinion why don't these companies bail out of the loss making activities and focus just on the commercial?

 

[Lee_M]

[QUOTE 2371885, member: 9609"]I don't think anyone has said it is a conspiracy to murder thier granny.

But their business model has been constructed in such away that the more vulnerable people in our society are clearly subsidising the more savvy by paying higher premiums. And that is wrong.

It is the same with the banks with their 'Reward' interest rates that revert to 0.1% after a year, and it is the same with the gas and electricity, those that are more savvy are getting a much better deal than the old and unwary. - And that is what I feel is so wrong about these giants of companies.[/quote]

I think you are putting way more thought and planning into this than they ever did.

In my experience their business model is constructed in the same way that a pile of bricks is constructed. It has eveolved over 30 odd years, their systems have done the same and it has ended where it is now. They absolutely could do more to fix it and sort out the things you're pissed off about - but in my experience (and I think we agree here), the people at the top are so out of touch with reality that they dont see the problem.

 

[MacB]

poor behaviours are symptomatic of a race to the bottom this is the squeeze that's been on for decades and is responsible for most of the things people complain about. What constitutes a poor behaviour is subjective but it's vanishingly rare that it would be a personal thing especially where larger companies are involved. This video is interesting:-

http://timharford.com/

second post on the blog as of today

 

[swee'pea99]

It's not wrong, it's just capitalism. And yes, it does end up with the vulnerable, the ignorant, the less savvy subsidising the smarter and more streetwise. It's not 'fair', but whoever imagined business was fair? Caveat emptor. Like it or loath it, no-one's ever come up with a better guiding principle. It's like when Churchill was asked which was the worst system of government and growled 'democracy', timing the stunned silence that followed to a t before adding 'except for all the others'.

 

[Lee_M]

In your opinion why don't these companies bail out of the loss making activities and focus just on the commercial?

partly fear of doing something that the others havent done, partly the negative PR of doing so and partly inertia.

There are a lot of changes going on though, for example one of the major companies sold its only profitable arm to provide the money to fix the rest. You might ask why not dump the rest and keep the profitable part - but I cant answer that