My car + Car insurance - is it worth it?? What happens if i cancel the ins??

Barks · 24 May 2009 at 00:15

InvaderGIR said:
First off, you're paying monthly, that's always a LOT more expensive than per annum, secondly are you on TPFT or FC?, thirdly if you cancel the payment, they will chase you for it, unless you've already agreed to cancel the policy, which you haven't.

I cancelled a policy over the phone, and then stopped the direct debit from coming out, they automatically tried to chase me for the money, but after speaking to them on the phone and sending them the relevant paperwork they stopped chasing. This means if you cancel the payment, they will still chase you for it, and you'll have to pay it.

Whilst you may think it's a complete joke etc. you are the one that got yourself into the mess, not the insurance company, or anyone else. You chose to have a car and to take out the policy, they just gave you a figure they are willing to cover you for, you accepted it by taking out the policy, so it's not their fault at all. It's also not their fault that young drivers have accidents that they have to pay out for, or that modern culture means people will claim for whiplash etc. when they don't have it which drives up everyone's premiums.

Also the insurance isn't just for the price of your car, it's the damage you could do to someone else's car/house/family etc.

I'm not disagreeing with any of your facts or statements, but the pricing policies which implement these seem irrational.

Area A - Bad postcode
17 Year old - £2000pa
25 year old - £400pa

Area B - Good postcode
17 year old - £1200pa
25 year old - £400pa

I can run quotes to provide examples of this. The 17 year old should not have to shell out an extra £800 (or significantly more) because of the "post code" when the older driver does not. The car has a similar risk of being vandalized/damaged whether it's driven by either driver. It's a case of charging the younger driver more because they can.
If anything the value added to the quote by bad post codes should be equal or very similar to drivers of any age (on top of the quote determined by all other factors) because essentially it is little to do with age and everything to do with the risk of the said car being stolen or vandalized. I would find it very difficult to believe driver's age and risk of car being stolen are correlated enough to justify such ridiculous premiums.

Janesy B · 24 May 2009 at 00:17

B&W said:
not really, thats a big excuse. theyre just another business trying to maximise there profits.

Or trying to make back the money lost on policies because they were lied to. If everyone was honest then prices would be a lot lower.

Vigoro · 24 May 2009 at 00:18

B&W said:
not really, thats a big excuse. theyre just another business trying to maximise there profits.

A big excuse which invalidates the insurance, which then means he is driving around illegally \o/

Of course that isnt a problem really is it?

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:20

Janesy B said:
Or trying to make back the money lost on policies because they were lied to. If everyone was honest then prices would be a lot lower.

makin money on lost policies lol, yeah theyre loaded mate jus another excuse tbh. cant believe jokers stik up for insurance companies.

no1s honest its in our nature.

Morba · 24 May 2009 at 00:21

scott212 said:
Age aside, society fails when you have to pay almost 7 times the value of the insured item to insure it

what?

how many incidents that require a claim actually only involve the car that is insured and nothing else at all?

InvaderGIR · 24 May 2009 at 00:21

B&W said:
makin money on lost policies lol, yeah theyre loaded mate jus another excuse tbh. cant believe jokers stik up for insurance companies.

no1s honest its in our nature.

You don't know much about insurance companies etc. do you?

And some of us are actually honest, because we don't want to lose out in the case of something happening.

Barks · 24 May 2009 at 00:24

People are dishonest and will do anything for money. Hence why something like 10:1 of whiplash claims are fraud.

Because car insurance is a legal requirement, in an ideal world it'd be run by a non-profiting organization or government body. I don't think many people shell out more than necessary for "luxury" car insurance, resulting in better customer service, as they would with hotels or holidays.

Janesy B · 24 May 2009 at 00:24

B&W said:
makin money on lost policies lol, yeah theyre loaded mate jus another excuse tbh. cant believe jokers stik up for insurance companies.

no1s honest its in our nature.

?

I'm not sticking up for them, of course they want a profit but people who front cost them a hell of a lot of money so that needs to be raked back. It's simple really.

No, you're dishonest. I don't even want to go into what I think of you.

InvaderGIR · 24 May 2009 at 00:25

scott212 said:
People are dishonest and will do anything for money. Hence why something like 10:1 of whiplash claims are fraud.

Yup. That's why I had a whiplash claim against me last year.

Vigoro · 24 May 2009 at 00:28

scott212 said:
People are dishonest and will do anything for money. Hence why something like 10:1 of whiplash claims are fraud.

Whiplash is really bad, and i know this. I also noticed you keep posting about and to be honest it is a problem.

I mean just the other day another driver said i gave them whiplash as i looked in the rear view mirror at them

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:30

Janesy B said:
?

I'm not sticking up for them, of course they want a profit but people who front cost them a hell of a lot of money so that needs to be raked back. It's simple really.

No, you're dishonest. I don't even want to go into what I think of you.

they make there money bak from first time drivers..

sometimes u have to lie in this world, ull realise it 1 day. well u probbaly hold disgust for me, i really dnt care dnt affect me in neway form or shape.

Barks · 24 May 2009 at 00:31

InvaderGIR said:
Yup. That's why I had a whiplash claim against me last year.

The thing is there is absolutely nothing that can be done. You can't just remove the ability to claim for it because it genuinely can ruin people's lives. The solution is to provide strong disincentives to claim for it. It will eventually reach a point where insurance companies are going to be crippled by rising legal costs in this modern society where law is no more than a profit-maximizing business. I can't wait for the day where "Injurylawyers4u" and other similar firms get put down for good. They should make it damn hard to claim for whip-lash, not a case of filling in some paperwork and getting some dollar handed to you on a silver platen

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:32

i have to admit i dont really like the amount of whiplash claims goin on thesedays. if u had a genuine accident then fair enuff otherwise allow that.

Janesy B · 24 May 2009 at 00:34

B&W said:
i have to admit i dont really like the amount of whiplash claims goin on thesedays. if u had a genuine accident then fair enuff otherwise allow that.

Yeah well sometimes we have to lie, as previously mentioned in one of your many nuggets of street wisdom. Can you tell me why you think it's not good to make fraudulent whiplash claims but it's ok to lie to the insurance company?

Barks · 24 May 2009 at 00:35

B&W said:
they make there money bak from first time drivers..

Exactly, this is true and can be justified to some extent but certainly the scale of pricing between first time drivers and experienced drivers is not fair reflecting statistics.

If insurance companies face rising costs, they will be passed largely onto younger drivers and hardly anything onto older drivers. Younger drivers pay ridiculous premiums no matter what, but they have to be a lot more competitive with older drivers who expect to pay much less. Thus it isn't practical in a business sense to pass on these costs to older clients.

Fair, no... but it does make sense from a business perspective I guess

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:36

Janesy B said:
Yeah well sometimes we have to lie, as previously mentioned in one of your many nuggets of street wisdom.

yeah when u have a genuine accident, not just making 1 up cus ur cars on the way out or u want a nice new courtesy car for a few months. altho that can be very very tempting...

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:37

scott212 said:
Exactly, this is true and can be justified to some extent but certainly the scale of pricing between first time drivers and experienced drivers is not fair reflecting statistics.

If insurance companies face rising costs, they will be passed largely onto younger drivers and hardly anything onto older drivers. Younger drivers pay ridiculous premiums no matter what, but they have to be a lot more competitive with older drivers who expect to pay much less. Thus it isn't practical in a business sense to pass on these costs to older clients.

Fair, no... but it does make sense from a business perspective I guess

exactly theyre a bunch of thieves, it serves them rite when fraudulant claims and stuff are made.

B&W · 24 May 2009 at 00:38

Janesy B said:
Can you tell me why you think it's not good to make fraudulent whiplash claims but it's ok to lie to the insurance company?

the former is just doint it on purpose to make money i mean if u do a accident on purpose with ur m8, on the other hand if u have a genuin accident then yeah make sum whiplashes up. make most of the situation.

InvaderGIR · 24 May 2009 at 00:40

B&W said:
yeah when u have a genuine accident, not just making 1 up cus ur cars on the way out or u want a nice new courtesy car for a few months. altho that can be very very tempting...

Your grasp of English, it isn't one.

I've had two genuine accidents, neither of which I've tried to claim from. Granted they were me crashing the cars, but both times I didn't try to get money from it, as there was no point, my fault, live and learn. And why would you purposefully crash your car?!

Stop trolling, please.

Janesy B · 24 May 2009 at 00:40

I don't do any accidents with my mates. I keep that sorta stuff to myself thanks.