New car time, going sensible this time.

If you want it taxed on sunday you have lost the month, me i'd just pick it up monday instead, and tell them to tax it from then.
 
I think I will, I don't specifically want it Sunday ...it's just what was arranged and then when I was driving home it occurred to me that it might not be desirable for the reasons mentioned, having said that, I would lose a month on the Jag then if I understand the DVLA's rules right, and the Jag costs more to tax than the Volvo.

Incidentally, I just got some interesting info, it seems that I have been on the wrong tax code for about the last 3 years, I have been paying more tax than I should have. Looks like the tax man might owe me several grand :) ...I'm not gonna get excited because I haven't looked into it yet ...but according to the firms financial controller it's wrong and I should see her asap ...although apparently the IRS wont speak to her about it ...only me. That would, needless to say be hugely helpful, although knowing the IRS I'll probably be middle aged before I see it.
 
I was just shortening Inland Revenue Service tbh ...I usually call them the Inland Revenue when I speak (or her Majesty's Bandits) ...I was just finding something shorter to type.
 
Arhh yes ok ...now usually I don't make mistakes like that ...I must be slipping eh. I did think I'd got it wrong I just couldn't quite think what it was tbh. Well that and I watch too many American TV programs.
 
[TW]Fox;19682173 said:
No, we have HM Revenue and Customs ;)
Click to expand...
Whatever, the last time I paid tax in the UK we still had the Inland Revenue :p
I didn't realise it had been merged with HM Customs and Excise.
 
I like the mk4 Mondeo, I think it's an excellent car. Far, far better than the Insignia.. Ugh. Moot point I know, but I thought I'd share it anyway :D

I also like Volvos. Now you can pretend to be a policeman and people on the motorway will move out of the way ;)
 
Well this is ...interesting. I just phoned my insurance company Admiral to switch over the insurance ...and would you believe that the Volvo is apparently £30 more to insure ...how can a group 9 2.0D car possibly cost more than a group 17 3.0 Jag ...which also has an expensive alu body ? ...I had quite a bit of trouble communicating with the person at Admiral as they had a very heavy accent ...but I just don't believe it. He assured me that it was right because the Volvo is a 2007 car and the Jaguar is a 2003 car and this has a major effect on the premium? ...**** off with that I say. It should be quite a lot cheaper to insure ...or the groupings are just crap ...and logic for that matter. So in theory if I try to insure a Nissan Pixo ...it'll cost even more then.

I'm actually not at all satisfied that this is accurate, so I am going to draw up quotes online for both myself and see what I get. Thing is, I could really do with speaking to someone who I can understand clearly.

Edit: Hmm I can't use Admiral's online quote system as a policy holder but I can use Bell's and I always had identical quotes off them anyway, and the Jag does indeed cost more to insure than the Volvo ...as logic would dictate but only by about £40 ...I expected the Volvo to be several hundred pounds less to be honest. I still think this is very odd. £669 for the Volvo and £710 for the Jag on Bell's system.

I expected the Volvo to be about £450 in all honesty. I guess it's not a massive deal, it's just not what I expected. I didn't check it before hand ...not that it would have made any difference if I had, but group 9 2.0D estate ...very sensible vs group 17 3 litre luxury car with rear wheel drive and aluminium construction ...what would anyone have thought ?
 
Last edited:
Moeks said:
Well this is ...interesting. I just phoned my insurance company Admiral to switch over the insurance ...and would you believe that the Volvo is apparently £30 more to insure ...how can a group 9 2.0D car possibly cost more than a group 17 3.0 Jag ...which also has an expensive alu body ? ...I had quite a bit of trouble communicating with the person at Admiral as they had a very heavy accent ...but I just don't believe it. He assured me that it was right because the Volvo is a 2007 car and the Jaguar is a 2003 car and this has a major effect on the premium? ...**** off with that I say. It should be quite a lot cheaper to insure ...or the groupings are just crap ...and logic for that matter. So in theory if I try to insure a Nissan Pixo ...it'll cost even more then.

I'm actually not at all satisfied that this is accurate, so I am going to draw up quotes online for both myself and see what I get. Thing is, I could really do with speaking to someone who I can understand clearly.

Edit: Hmm I can't use Admiral's online quote system as a policy holder but I can use Bell's and I always had identical quotes off them anyway, and the Jag does indeed cost more to insure than the Volvo ...as logic would dictate but only by about £40 ...I expected the Volvo to be several hundred pounds less to be honest. I still think this is very odd. £669 for the Volvo and £710 for the Jag on Bell's system.

I expected the Volvo to be about £450 in all honesty. I guess it's not a massive deal, it's just not what I expected. I didn't check it before hand ...not that it would have made any difference if I had, but group 9 2.0D estate ...very sensible vs group 17 3 litre luxury car with rear wheel drive and aluminium construction ...what would anyone have thought ?
Click to expand...

All sounds perfectly fine to me?
 
You think it sounds fine that a 2 litre diesel estate car with a list price half of what the Jag had, 100bhp less, 1000cc less and a rather smaller and less expensive construction costs basically the same to insure ? ...mmmk!

I disagree. But at the end of the day, the Volvo was insurance group 9 and the Jag 17 under the older system and 24 and 42 respectively under the newer one Parker's is showing ...so how can the prices be as they are ?
 
Yea I actually thought of that after I wrote that, having said that if past experience is anything to go on, the quote will be the same as Bell's anyway.

I am looking forward to collecting it later today anyway, although I will miss the engine and interior of the Jag ...and the way it looks. I feel a lot less conflicted this time than when I swapped the black Jag for a 540i though, I drove the Jag there and the BMW back knowing in my gut I had made the wrong decision ...but was too proud to admit it ...and also wanted a 540i for some reason I can't explain too much to back out. I don't feel that way at all about this, it's a pragmatic choice ....an economic decision really and probably a good move all things considered. Weather the V50 or the Mondeo or the Mazda 6 or even an older V70 was the best choice I don't know really, but really they are all much of a muchness to me anyway, I just picked the one I did as I found one I liked and I liked it more than the Mondeo the Passat and the Saab 9-3 ...the 6 was a little too expensive and the V70 I didn't look at because it didn't quite fit my criteria and budget ...i.e. no more than 5 years old, no more than 80k miles on the clock and 1 owner ...and everytime I have let my 'sensible' criteria lapse in the past I have regretted it somehow ...the Mondeo ST220 was bought with strict criteria with regards to condition, age and mileage and that was a perfect car.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom