Insurance woes

[cheesyboy]

Length of ownership has been a factor for over 10 years on my Admiral underwritten policy. Suits me as I don't change cars often.

It makes sense - if you've had a car for 10 years, then that's 10 years of not writing a car off. In some ways, that's more assurance than reporting that you've not had an accident.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Could equally go the other way, you’re more familiar with it so are prepared to take more risks? When I get a new to me car I do tend to drive a lot slower until I get used to it.

does it take you 9 years to get used to a car?

takes me 2 weeks at best. i'm usually bored after 3 months.

 

[paradigm]

does it take you 9 years to get used to a car?

takes me 2 weeks at best. i'm usually bored after 3 months.

Taking into account vehicle history would make more sense than arbitrarily deciding that premiums go down due to owning a specific vehicle for an indeterminate length of time.

Jumping into a 250BHP RWD car after only owning a string of 75BHP FWD hatchbacks for example has potentially far more that could go wrong than the same person buying yet another ecobox.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Taking into account vehicle history would make more sense than arbitrarily deciding that premiums go down due to owning a specific vehicle for an indeterminate length of time.

Jumping into a 250BHP RWD car after only owning a string of 75BHP FWD hatchbacks for example has potentially far more that could go wrong than the same person buying yet another ecobox.

I think the reasoning is fine.

If you have just bought a car you have zero experience therefore higher risk.

If you have had it a year you now know how it drives so less of a risk.

 

[paradigm]

I think the reasoning is fine.

If you have just bought a car you have zero experience therefore higher risk.

If you have had it a year you now know how it drives so less of a risk.

Sure, but what if a 1.2 Polo was replaced by a 1.2 Polo (as with my mother). Sure, they've owned the new car for a few days, but it's identical to the last, so where's the "knowing how it drives" coming from in that instance?

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Sure, but what if a 1.2 Polo was replaced by a 1.2 Polo (as with my mother). Sure, they've owned the new car for a few days, but it's identical to the last, so where's the "knowing how it drives" coming from in that instance?

surely in those instances it would be a newer polo, possibly different model, more power, different tyres, etc.

you could get into 2 cars the exact same yet handle completely differently.

 

[paradigm]

Surely in those instances it would be a newer polo

Newer in terms of registration plate, yes, but both within the same run of model, same power, engine, number of doors, etc. The colour is different, I guess. Does white paint move through the air quicker than red?

different tyres

Do you inform your insurance company if you put Michelins on a car that came with Goodyear? What about if a particular model of tyre gets retired and you buy the replacement?

you could get into 2 cars the exact same yet handle completely differently.

You could, or you could simply buy the same model twice...

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Newer in terms of registration plate, yes, but both within the same run of model, same power, engine, number of doors, etc. The colour is different, I guess. Does white paint move through the air quicker than red?



Do you inform your insurance company if you put Michelins on a car that came with Goodyear? What about if a particular model of tyre gets retired and you buy the replacement?



You could, or you could simply buy the same model twice...

the point with the tyres being if i've had a car for a year with crap tyres i've found the limits of what they can or can't do in that year.

if i've bought a new car with crap tyres and i've come from a car with good tyres. i could easily lose it on a wet roundabout / corner, etc because i'm not used to having crap tyres.

so it would be a riskier aspect changing car. a new car will always offer more risk than the same car a year on.

 

[Nasher]

Think how many beat up Ford focuses there are on the road, driven by people who don't care and crashed. There are a LOT less Lexuses around and their owners tend to be more sensible (older ) and look after them better.

I've never seen premiums go down with length of ownership. Even with the good insurers...

 

[paradigm]

so it would be a riskier aspect changing car. a new car will always offer more risk than the same car a year on.

I will be up-front here and state that I'm only playing devils advocate, however...

What if (as again with my mother as the example) both cars were brand new? Both came with decent tyres. Surely the newer braking surfaces/material and guaranteed state of the tyres (i.e new) come into play. I'm sure from the insurance companies point of view, going blindly off the length of time you've owned a car is rather irrelevant. Adding in factors like the age of the vehicle could lend to your arguments, but I still feel that knowing the previous vehicle would mean more. Surprised it's not asked, I guess proof becomes potentially problematic, though it should be on your previous insurance cert/renewal quote.

That said, when insuring the TT through greenlight, the underwriters did want to know if I'd owned a car with over 200BHP before, though they asked for no proof, nor details, just a yes or no.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I will be up-front here and state that I'm only playing devils advocate, however...

What if (as again with my mother as the example) both cars were brand new? Both came with decent tyres. Surely the newer braking surfaces/material and guaranteed state of the tyres (i.e new) come into play. I'm sure from the insurance companies point of view, going blindly off the length of time you've owned a car is rather irrelevant. Adding in factors like the age of the vehicle could lend to your arguments, but I still feel that knowing the previous vehicle would mean more. Surprised it's not asked, I guess proof becomes potentially problematic, though it should be on your previous insurance cert/renewal quote.

That said, when insuring the TT through greenlight, the underwriters did want to know if I'd owned a car with over 200BHP before, though they asked for no proof, nor details, just a yes or no.

i wasn't allowed insurance on the z4 with my current provider when i changed car. they are a big name and they said. your age (under 30 specifically was mentioned) + convertible + less than 3 years NCB = no go had nothing to do with the fact it had a 3 litre engine or over 200bhp. if i had another years NCB i would have been fine or had i been older or had it been the coupe.

it's just how these things work.

 

[Nasher]

i wasn't allowed insurance on the z4 with my current provider when i changed car. they are a big name and they said. your age (under 30 specifically was mentioned) + convertible + less than 3 years NCB = no go had nothing to do with the fact it had a 3 litre engine or over 200bhp. if i had another years NCB i would have been fine or had i been older or had it been the coupe.

it's just how these things work.

Some of the specialist insurers just don't like BMWs, they have really bad claims statistics and it would mean hiking other premiums. E.g. Greenlight won't insure any BMWs.

 

[DereksDontRun]

How does that work if the car has only just been released out of interest?

purely hypothetically, as I don't work in insurance, but I could understand an argument along the lines:

A brand new car with zero history would be calculated based on its value with an arguably minimal risk, as there's no statistics for that risk (or, risk possibly based on cars of an equivalent value). Only reason why I can understand why my M135i is cheaper than my previous MX5 when the car is over twice the power and surely a higher theft risk, plus being more for any payout, whether repair or write-off. It's the same for a mate and his brand new Focus RS, when compared with his older Clio RS. The 2nd hand prices are arguably still high enough to keep it out of the hands of youngsters, 1st cars buyers or those likely to chose ditch-finder tyres. So, as the model gets older, there's more on the road and they start to filter into hands of younger people, more get crashed (due to inexperience, exuberance, cost-saving maintenance, etc) and risk/prices go up. Sure, a lot of sweeping statements (without even questioning any geographic affluence and if there's an argument that those buying newer cars might statistically store the car at a safer location/postcode), but I could imagine (statistically) the risk of a model increases as it ages to a point that it's affordable by higher risk demographic.

 

[theone8181]

i wasn't allowed insurance on the z4 with my current provider when i changed car. they are a big name and they said. your age (under 30 specifically was mentioned) + convertible + less than 3 years NCB = no go had nothing to do with the fact it had a 3 litre engine or over 200bhp. if i had another years NCB i would have been fine or had i been older or had it been the coupe.

it's just how these things work.

Strange, when I got my first 911 (at 23, 300hp 996 c2) I had no issues insuring it (although it cost 1200 quid to insure). When I moved from my last 911 middle of last year to an e92 m3 my premium practically doubled even though the m3 is much slower, 13 plate instead of 51 plate and I'd of thought that the parts would be cheaper for an m3 compared to a 911 turbo. I just don't get premiums. Oh also for a laugh I added my mum onto the 911 at first, it went up to 1800 quid so I quickly took her off lol.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Strange, when I got my first 911 (at 23, 300hp 996 c2) I had no issues insuring it (although it cost 1200 quid to insure). When I moved from my last 911 middle of last year to an e92 m3 my premium practically doubled even though the m3 is much slower, 13 plate instead of 51 plate and I'd of thought that the parts would be cheaper for an m3 compared to a 911 turbo. I just don't get premiums. Oh also for a laugh I added my mum onto the 911 at first, it went up to 1800 quid so I quickly took her off lol.

i didn't have any issues either i just changed company. it meant i lost half a years NCB

 

[TNGL]

I'm a pricing actuary (not motor though) but having spoken with my colleague who's worked as a motor pricing actuary for over 5 years, I can assure you it very much is a combination of statistics, continual monitoring of the portfolio, market conditions and regulation.

More often than not, heaps of data feed a GLM (a type of statistical model) which after a few tweaks, will output a premium. In simpler cases, it is merely a multiplicative structure (e.g. base = 500, age relativity = 0.8, car type relativity = 1.9 to give a premium of 500 * 0.8 * 1.9 = £760 per year). Such relativities would usually be the combination of statistics + underwriting input.

Continual monitoring of the portfolio refers to the fact that if a certain segment of the book (e.g. middle-aged performance car drivers) begins to deteriorate, a rate increase may be applied upon renewal, taking the price elasticity of the premium into account too.

Regulation can have an impact on the premium, e.g. Ogden rate changes and the subsequent impact on periodic payment orders. How litigious a country is will also affect the premium dramatically.

Motor and travel are some of the most technically priced types of insurance you can buy. It is when you enter the territory of marine, financial lines and other specialty lines that you begin to see numbers plucked out of the sky.

 

[muon]

Could equally go the other way, you’re more familiar with it so are prepared to take more risks? When I get a new to me car I do tend to drive a lot slower until I get used to it.

Showing that you've driven a car for 14 years without writing it off isn't too shabby a record to show and likely born out in the data.

 

[Invertigo]

I've never seen premiums go down with length of ownership. Even with the good insurers...

When I was renewing this year, I actually let my insurance lapse for 2 weeks and used the other halfs car (bought the car 2 weeks after inception of the policy last year). The reason? Saying I had owned the car for 1 calendar year vs 350 days reduced the premium by 30%. Absurd, I know, but it seems 1 year is the "computer says..." cutoff.