Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • AnotherJoe
    • By AnotherJoe 7th Dec 17, 7:35 PM
    • 7,674Posts
    • 8,288Thanks
    AnotherJoe
    “Protected” no claims, is it worth it ?
    • #1
    • 7th Dec 17, 7:35 PM
    “Protected” no claims, is it worth it ? 7th Dec 17 at 7:35 PM
    Just going through insurance for a new car and one of the options is to protect my NCD.

    However I recall many years ago having an accident (hands up my fault) and despite me keeping my NCD my insurance still doubled the next year, so I’m not convinced it did me any good, and when filling in my details, via a compare site, I had two questions to answer, did I have NCD and had I had an accident in the last 5 years. So, are these really separate or would I be needlessly be paying Ł30 for protected NCD which would be pointless ?
Page 1
    • FreddieFrugal
    • By FreddieFrugal 7th Dec 17, 7:49 PM
    • 1,558 Posts
    • 1,664 Thanks
    FreddieFrugal
    • #2
    • 7th Dec 17, 7:49 PM
    • #2
    • 7th Dec 17, 7:49 PM
    You keep your discount - but the discount is coming off a much higher base price because you had an accident.

    Your price would have been even higher had you not had the NCD protection.
    Mortgage remaining: Ł43,140 of Ł77,000 (2.59% til 04/18)

    Savings target July 17 - Ł17,960 / Ł28,000
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 7th Dec 17, 8:44 PM
    • 4,167 Posts
    • 3,669 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    • #3
    • 7th Dec 17, 8:44 PM
    • #3
    • 7th Dec 17, 8:44 PM
    Like all insurance, it's essentially gambling - with the odds loaded in favour of the "bookie" like any other form.

    If they've done their sums right then that means the overall extra take in "protection" premiums will be more than they "give away" in NCD that would otherwise be lost.

    So you pays yer money (or not) and takes yer chance.

    Personally, I've always paid nothing but the basic and then avoided getting into situations where the optional extras might be needed
    • JustAnotherSaver
    • By JustAnotherSaver 7th Dec 17, 10:27 PM
    • 2,618 Posts
    • 415 Thanks
    JustAnotherSaver
    • #4
    • 7th Dec 17, 10:27 PM
    • #4
    • 7th Dec 17, 10:27 PM

    Personally, I've always paid nothing but the basic and then avoided getting into situations where the optional extras might be needed
    Originally posted by Joe Horner
    Interesting.

    So you're parked up out of the way of everyone else but when you come back to your car it's been bumped.

    Do you just then not repair it? Or do you take the hit & claim?

    • Tarambor
    • By Tarambor 8th Dec 17, 10:26 AM
    • 1,751 Posts
    • 1,203 Thanks
    Tarambor
    • #5
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:26 AM
    • #5
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:26 AM
    If you've got a fair whack of NCD its not worth protecting. If you have only a few years it is. Reason is that for someone with say 8 or 9 years or more NCD in the event of a single claim they don't lose the lot unlike someone in their first few years of getting NCD. It'll get dropped down to something like 4 to 5 years. So they're still going to be getting a decent discount with 4 or 5 years NCD and the difference between that and what it would be with 8 years NCD doesn't make it worth paying what can be a significant amount to protect it over several years.

    Unfortunately far too many people mistakenly believe that if they have protected NCD then it means in the event of a claim their insurance won't go up.
    • wongataa
    • By wongataa 8th Dec 17, 10:42 AM
    • 1,148 Posts
    • 627 Thanks
    wongataa
    • #6
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:42 AM
    • #6
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:42 AM
    If you've got a fair whack of NCD its not worth protecting. If you have only a few years it is. Reason is that for someone with say 8 or 9 years or more NCD in the event of a single claim they don't lose the lot unlike someone in their first few years of getting NCD. It'll get dropped down to something like 4 to 5 years.
    Originally posted by Tarambor
    If you have more than 5 years NCD and you make a claim you will usually end up with 3 years NCD as the claim will take 2 off but they tend to limit you to 5 years NCD for the sum.
    • paddyandstumpy
    • By paddyandstumpy 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    • 916 Posts
    • 409 Thanks
    paddyandstumpy
    • #7
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    • #7
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    If you've got a fair whack of NCD its not worth protecting. If you have only a few years it is. Reason is that for someone with say 8 or 9 years or more NCD in the event of a single claim they don't lose the lot unlike someone in their first few years of getting NCD. It'll get dropped down to something like 4 to 5 years. So they're still going to be getting a decent discount with 4 or 5 years NCD and the difference between that and what it would be with 8 years NCD doesn't make it worth paying what can be a significant amount to protect it over several years.

    Unfortunately far too many people mistakenly believe that if they have protected NCD then it means in the event of a claim their insurance won't go up.
    Originally posted by Tarambor
    ^^^^ is incorrect

    If you have more than 5 years NCD and you make a claim you will usually end up with 3 years NCD as the claim will take 2 off but they tend to limit you to 5 years NCD for the sum.
    Originally posted by wongataa
    ^^^^ is correct.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    • 33,539 Posts
    • 17,432 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #8
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    • #8
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:45 AM
    If you've got a fair whack of NCD its not worth protecting. If you have only a few years it is. Reason is that for someone with say 8 or 9 years or more NCD in the event of a single claim they don't lose the lot .......
    Originally posted by Tarambor
    Insurers normally only offer protected NCD to policyholders with 4 or more years already

    Irrespective of how many years NCD you have, a claim normally means no ncd awarded for the current year and loss of 2 years from a maximum (which is usually 5 years).

    Thus if you have 9 years NCD a fault claim could mean only 3 years to use at renewal.

    Check your policy wording to see how your insurer deals with ncd following a fault claim
    • IanMSpencer
    • By IanMSpencer 8th Dec 17, 10:58 AM
    • 1,126 Posts
    • 880 Thanks
    IanMSpencer
    • #9
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:58 AM
    • #9
    • 8th Dec 17, 10:58 AM
    I've tried to get this clarified as I think it is misleading, but the financial ombudsman minion was clicking his bureaucracy reply buttons and wanting me to fill in forms I'd already filled in before proceeding.

    My belief is that this came out of the change in insurance market driven by Direct Line who were far more proactive in profiling their clients. Before then you had a premium and you had NCD and the NCD was the full adjustment for the claims record, so back in the 80s you would be a male 25 year old driver in a group 4 car with no convictions and that would define your premium and then the claims record would adjust your actual premium giving you a discount if you had no claims.

    With the move to a more competitive market, to try and be cleverer, the claims record became a factor in the base premium, and so now you have an accident you potentially have both a loss of NCD and an increase in base premium. "Insuring" your NCD is not great value for money as it does not actually cover that great deal of money.

    On any insurance, you need to look at the premium and the amount it pays out. What is the NCD element of your premiums going to be reduced by over 3 years (let's assume you are not going to have a string of accidents if you currently have reached the stage of being a settled experienced driver and have left most of the youthful hormones behind!)? I was quite surprised how little my wife's premium went up on her insurance having had an at fault accident - less than my premium went up which I suspect was due to her claims record as a named driver on my policy.

    Arguably, NCD should be obsolete, the premium takes account of the claims record, and should be priced accordingly. Given that NCDs are effectively transferable across insurers, they serve no real purpose, especially as you have to declare incidents which then affect your base premium, regardless of you making a claim. I think it's all too difficult for the man in the street to assess properly.
    • takman
    • By takman 8th Dec 17, 12:48 PM
    • 2,895 Posts
    • 2,407 Thanks
    takman
    Interesting.

    So you're parked up out of the way of everyone else but when you come back to your car it's been bumped.

    Do you just then not repair it? Or do you take the hit & claim?
    Originally posted by JustAnotherSaver
    Personally i always park away from other cars and in a "sensible" location and i have never had any car damaged in a car park to any of my cars.
    • Nobbie1967
    • By Nobbie1967 8th Dec 17, 2:40 PM
    • 680 Posts
    • 784 Thanks
    Nobbie1967
    I tend only to insure where legally obliged or for events that would be financially painful should they occur such as my house burning down or my car being stolen. For everything else, I self-insure and protect my stuff from potential loss by taking sensible precautions.

    If you take all the insurance you are offered, you are just making money for the insurance industry and subsidising those less careful/lucky/honest than yourself.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 8th Dec 17, 2:42 PM
    • 4,930 Posts
    • 3,937 Thanks
    glentoran99
    I tend only to insure where legally obliged or for events that would be financially painful should they occur such as my house burning down or my car being stolen. For everything else, I self-insure and protect my stuff from potential loss by taking sensible precautions.

    If you take all the insurance you are offered, you are just making money for the insurance industry and subsidising those less careful/lucky/honest than yourself.
    Originally posted by Nobbie1967




    so I take it your only insured 3rd Party fire and theft then?
    • fred246
    • By fred246 8th Dec 17, 4:39 PM
    • 917 Posts
    • 498 Thanks
    fred246
    so I take it your only insured 3rd Party fire and theft then?
    Originally posted by glentoran99
    TPFT is often more expensive that comprehensive. You just use comprehensive, put up your excesses to the max and refuse all extras.
    • sheramber
    • By sheramber 8th Dec 17, 8:40 PM
    • 3,990 Posts
    • 2,964 Thanks
    sheramber
    Personally i always park away from other cars and in a "sensible" location and i have never had any car damaged in a car park to any of my cars.
    Originally posted by takman

    I parked out of the way where I had 8 empty spaces on one side and 10 empty spaces on the other side and not a sole in sight.

    I came back from my shopping to 8 empty spaces and 10 empty spaces, no sole in sight but the whole side of my car damaged by someone trying park next to me and there bumper denting the length of the car on the way in and on the way out agin.

    I have been hit by driver who came round a bend over the middle of the road, hit me and drove on at speed. I had no chance to get any details as he disappeared round the next bend
    • Joe Horner
    • By Joe Horner 8th Dec 17, 10:01 PM
    • 4,167 Posts
    • 3,669 Thanks
    Joe Horner
    Interesting.

    So you're parked up out of the way of everyone else but when you come back to your car it's been bumped.

    Do you just then not repair it? Or do you take the hit & claim?
    Originally posted by JustAnotherSaver
    Not happened yet, if it did I'd just straighten it out and carry on
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

728Posts Today

4,505Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Today's Twitter poll: Should pubs and restaurants be made by law to allow non customers (behaving reasonably) to use their toilets?

  • Nice debating with (all but the rude ones) of you. Bedtime for me now. Goodnight #bbcqt

  • RT @kevmthomas: @MartinSLewis It was a comment you made about the referendum being a binary choice on a non binary issue that helped me rea?

  • Follow Martin