Any of you 17 and insured?

iaind said:
Real life facepalm here
Click to expand...

Golf GTI (200bhp) on an 06 reg was just under £2,000 on Bell for me in September before my 21st birthday.
The same car, all other factors besides age constant, is now just a shade over £800 to insure.

The Mini Cooper I took insurance out on before my 21st birthday was around £700. I can now, 2 months later, insure a brand new 59 plate Cooper S for about £50 more, the quote back then was around £1,500.

So clearly from this data, statistics show that there is indeed quite a significant difference in risk between a 20 year old male driver and a 21 year old male driver. The prices do obviously not reflect the change of risk over 2 months but over the entire period as a 20 year old and a 21 year old as a whole.

(Just realised these quotes are for the 10 month policy)
 
And your point is?

How do you suggest they calculate risk? Colour of your hair? What you had for breakfast? Maybe you should just be able to ask them nicely for the price you want....
 
iaind said:
And your point is?

How do you suggest they calculate risk? Colour of your hair? What you had for breakfast? Maybe you should just be able to ask them nicely for the price you want....
Click to expand...

Don't even bother. We've done this to death.
 
I know, I participated in the thread he made a while back just to rant about the random age thing he seems to think is an issue...... some people wont listen though I guess!
 
You think I don't listen, you're the problem as you brought it up.

Very few people on here have actually shared thoughtful and insightful points or arguments towards my criticism of the car insurance industry.

All you have done is shown that you accept it, pay it and fail to acknowledge market failures, inefficiencies, legal exploitations, technological limitations or the simple fact that it is grossly unfair to all consumers by its very nature. No matter how much information they gather on an individual (that might include your hair colour or what you had for breakfast :D) they can still never cater an extremely accurate and fair risk assessment for them.

For all you know if we had an advanced empirical study into the finite factors which affect risk, age could well be far more irrelevant and have little causality than it is considered. It's fascinating to think that a truly fair mathematical model to calculate risk could involve hundreds of thousands of variables, hence why technical limitations hinder efficiency in the market.
 
Last edited:
Logistical limitations, not technical limitations. And an approximator is all age can be. It will never be possible to produce definitively tailored insurance policies because doing so actually defies the point of insurance. The only way you can produce a 'fair' insurance policy is by knowing the absolute likelihood of a person having a claim, and the absolute cost of that claim, and because there are too many variables to have a sufficiently large data source to know the average costs for every combination of variables, the only way it could be calculated would be by knowing the vector, velocity and mass of every particle in existence - and if that could be known, insurance would be irrelevant as you would 'know' what will happen.

/hypothetical waffle :D
 
miniyazz said:
Logistical limitations, not technical limitations. And an approximator is all age can be. It will never be possible to produce definitively tailored insurance policies because doing so actually defies the point of insurance. The only way you can produce a 'fair' insurance policy is by knowing the absolute likelihood of a person having a claim, and the absolute cost of that claim, and because there are too many variables to have a sufficiently large data source to know the average costs for every combination of variables, the only way it could be calculated would be by knowing the vector, velocity and mass of every particle in existence - and if that could be known, insurance would be irrelevant as you would 'know' what will happen.

/hypothetical waffle :D
Click to expand...

That's what I'm talking about :p
 
Last edited:
I hate they way car insurance is dictated by a load of companies who are making shed loads of cash out of the system.

Insurance is required by law, so profiting from it should not be allowed. It should cover its own costs, and perhaps be run by a government appointed body. Perhaps at least if they made money it could be pumped back into the country, or maybe help reduce our tax load..

*edit* Yes, I do understand how much of a massive undertaking it would be, and how many jobs would be lost. Which is why it will never happen. No government would ever make such a forcefull and helpfull change.
 
For the guys around my age, 25.

How much was your insurance when you were 17?

I was just a named driver on both family cars, so I have no figure to base it on. My first own insurance was at 21 (I think), £650 ish fully comp

At 17, all my money went on beer/games etc. I never really drove that far anyway at the time, but still.
 
Last edited:
Young driver here, The Admiral group are constantly the cheapest insurers for me in a UB8 (bad) post code. So try Admiral, Elephant and Bell :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom