Why have insurance brokers/undewriters & the mid & police

raskazz

tommy45 wrote: »

if you think for one minute that anyone with any commonsense will belive that then you did come down in the last shower,

insurance company not turning a profit= crease trading they all are making profit if the didn't they would not be providing insurance or be able to pay their wages bill for staff, some insurance comanies do charge over inflated prices,maybe those are the ones not making a huege ammount of profit, i wonder why that is? could it be the country is f***ed and most who live here are skint?

I refer you to my question earlier in the thread:

"Could you please confirm which motor insurers 'overcharge' for policies? Then we can look at their accounts to examine whether they have made supernormal profit."

I eagerly await your response.

tommy45

raskazz wrote: »

I refer you to my question earlier in the thread:

"Could you please confirm which motor insurers 'overcharge' for policies? Then we can look at their accounts to examine whether they have made supernormal profit."

I eagerly await your response.

what you would call 'supernormal' would be different to what my opinion of such would be ,so no point really is there? facts are if insurance co's spent our money more wisely premiums would not be so high so for example insured needs a hire car, does the insurance co, shop around to find a company who is charging them the same or less than what it would charge a customer off ther street? no they don't, they get stiffed, instead, so much so in some cases it would of been cheaper to of bought the hire car, why because they take too long to sort out claims even when liabilty has been determined, but they are not bothered because we end up paying for it in our premiums the next year, like the hike in prices this month, due to the ammount of claims last winter, i never claimed last winter why should my renewal be inreased as a result? wrong is what it is, and as someone has said we do get ripped by underwriters by the ammount they want to charge, but no doubt you raskzz will find fault or wish to argue your case as you would so matter what i post, but the thing i bet you are not prepared to tell us is you are perhaps a employee of some insurance co or brokers , ?

dacouch

The claims from last Winter will have had a fairly minor effect on premiums as Insurers factor in unusual weather / unusual events into the money they set aside for claims. There are a number of issues that are causing larger impacts on Insurance premiums as Dunstonh has mentioned on this thread or another they have all come together to in effect cause a perfect storm in relation to affecting premiums.

With regard to hire cars, when Insurers actually get the chance to provide a hire car they do have very good deals at rates vastly lower than the general public can access. Customers are often pushed into credit hire cars by garages, accident management companies, brokers etc etc at rates well above the going rate. The Insurers have little influence over these as often the garage and / or accident management company are paying for the repair and they have a habit of hanging the job out to get the hire costs up. The Insurers hands are bound by case laws on contacting the other party to offer their own car once the driver has agreed a credit hire car.

Insurers profit on car insurance is generally between 7% and an actual loss of 10% probably averaging out at around 2% of the premium and for that they are accepting huge risks. So on an average premium an Insurer will make circa £11 a year (Assuming their underwriting profit is circa 2%)

raskazz

tommy45 wrote: »

what you would call 'supernormal' would be different to what my opinion of such would be ,so no point really is there?

So in other words you don't have the foggiest about prevailing market conditions in UK motor insurance. Why not provide some figures then we can discuss what is and what isn't supernormal profit?

tommy45 wrote: »

facts are if insurance co's spent our money more wisely premiums would not be so high so for example insured needs a hire car, does the insurance co, shop around to find a company who is charging them the same or less than what it would charge a customer off ther street? no they don't, they get stiffed, instead, so much so in some cases it would of been cheaper to of bought the hire car,

The insurer cannot prevent a third party obtaining credit hire. What they can do is to make efforts at third party capture to try to steer them away from credit hire and most, if not all, insurers now do this (for example LV halve the excess a taxi driver has to pay if they report an accident promptly and reduce the time that a third party is on hire; fleet insurers encourage the use of 'bump cards' so that where liability is not in dispute third parties are encouraged to deal direct with the insurer of the at fault party). There is a also a raft of recent case law involving insurers and credit hire firms which confirms that insurers are challenging the trend towards inflated credit hire. Clearly you have nothing beyind the most basic knowledge on this particular issue.

tommy45 wrote: »

why because they take too long to sort out claims even when liabilty has been determined, but they are not bothered

Absolute nonsense. As I mentioned earlier, third party capture has been on the agenda for at least 5 or more years now and all motor insurers aim to settle claims faster. I know that my employer is settling claims faster as I have seen the stats and the effects on loss ratio trends first hand. Indeed, following the MOJ reforms which came into force in the spring insurers are compelled to deal with certain claims in a much shorter timescale - see here if you want to educate your self on this:

http://www.zurich.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/0C5064E3-FC10-4E20-AC64-6ADA5F9B4844/0/MOJTechnicalfactsheetUKGI357webversion.pdf

tommy45 wrote: »

because we end up paying for it in our premiums the next year

You seem to imply that any one insurer can just jack up premiums with no regard for the effects on retention or the heat map of accepted risks? That is nonsense.

tommy45 wrote: »

like the hike in prices this month

There has not been a 'hike' in prices this month. For example, Commercial Vehicle rates have increased maybe 5-6% in the last month. This is less than the increases of 10% or more in March-April when Quinn were forced to withdraw from the market.

tommy45 wrote: »

due to the ammount of claims last winter

The causes of motor rate inflation are far more complex than just claims in the winter. Off the top of my head:

• Worsening claim severity due to increased frequency of personal injury claims and a higher average number of claimants per claim
• Higher customer 'churn' due to aggregators and customers focusing almost exclusively on price. All other things equal this will lead to a higher expense ratio.
• Increased third party hire costs due to credit hire and so-called 'ambulance chasers'
• Weak investment return due to global economic conditions
• Increase in economically motivated fraud due to local economic conditions
• Increase in 'point of sale' fraud i.e. misrepresentation and non-disclosure
• The effects of a changing regulatory environment i.e. Solvency II

tommy45 wrote: »

i never claimed last winter why should my renewal be inreased as a result?

That is a totally spurious argument and holds no water. The point is, due to the above it is likely that your premium was too low in relation to risk last year and if you do claim this year then it is likely to cost more.

tommy45 wrote: »

wrong is what it is, and as someone has said we do get ripped by underwriters by the ammount they want to charge, but no doubt you raskzz will find fault or wish to argue your case as you would so matter what i post, but the thing i bet you are not prepared to tell us is you are perhaps a employee of some insurance co or brokers , ?

I think you should really do your homework before you return to the thread in order to avoid resorting to ad hominem arguments and thus to avoid further embarrassment.

tommy45

raskazz wrote: »

You seem to imply that any one insurer can just jack up premiums with no regard for the effects on retention or the heat map of accepted risks? That is nonsense.

Why can't they , you think that the customer base is going to take your word or the word of any insurance company or broker do you?

raskazz wrote: »

There has not been a 'hike' in prices this month. For example, Commercial Vehicle rates have increased maybe 5-6% in the last month. This is less than the increases of 10% or more in March-April when Quinn were forced to withdraw from the market.

Has there not,? OK, in both June -July this year i did several searches for quotes online using all comparison sites that i am aware of, the average price was over £100 cheaper(same vehicle and details) then than it is this month, but they don't jack the prices up do they, must be my imagination or a fallacy eh?,but i ain't gonna rise to your b/s mate , your industry needs tighter regulation that includes the prices they can charge IMHO

zppp

tommy45 wrote: »

your industry needs tighter regulation that includes the prices they can charge IMHO

The prices they charge are based on risk, and are private companies, they can choose however much they like for insurance.

Regarding your quote, it may be lower now becaue there is some form of discount at the moment, or the level of risk has improved.

raskazz

tommy45 wrote: »

Why can't they , you think that the customer base is going to take your word or the word of any insurance company or broker do you?

I don't expect you to take my word for it, no. In an ideal world you would use Google and educate yourself about these topics before spouting off about them; but clearly you have no inclination to do so. You might want to consider what the price elasticity of demand is in a competitive market and also consider that an insurer has to price according to risk not only according to market to ensure that some sort of risk selection is in operation.

tommy45 wrote: »

Has there not,? OK, in both June -July this year i did several searches for quotes online using all comparison sites that i am aware of, the average price was over £100 cheaper(same vehicle and details) then than it is this month

Erm, I think I'll base my view of the market on my own employer's research of a 'basket' of over a hundred risks rather than deduce anything from your searches for 1 risk only - i.e. your own. You can hardly extrapolate any meaningful information on the market as a whole from 1 risk.

tommy45 wrote: »

, but they don't jack the prices up do they, must be my imagination or a fallacy eh?,but i ain't gonna rise to your b/s mate , your industry needs tighter regulation that includes the prices they can charge IMHO

Define 'jack up' - it's not a very scientific term. I think you will actually find that in real terms, motor insurance has been the cheapest that it has ever been since around 2006, and the UK motor insurance market is one of the most competitive in the world, so calling for regulation of pricing is a little foolish. Bear in mind that actually the regulator is currently more concerned with under-pricing and lack of solvency in motor insurance rather than over-pricing - Quinn were compelled to increase prices by the regulator because they were consistently underpricing risks to an extent which was totally unsustainable.

Your whole argument seems to be based on the notion that if prices for a product increase then there must be some sort of 'rip-off' in place - that is nonsense. It's just a shame that you seem to have no desire to actually educate yourself about the issues involved; you'd rather engage in what are basically uninformed rants.

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to provide any evidence whatsoever that motor insurers are making supernormal profit. Whilst we're waiting for you to provide that, here's a little light reading for you:

http://www.postonline.co.uk/post/news/1585428/motor-loss-ratios-exceed-115

"Combined loss ratios for the private and commercial motor insurance market in 2009 are set to exceed 115% according to EMB."

http://www.broking.co.uk/insurance-age/news/1728104/allianzs-half-results-gwp-rise-profits-drop?WT.rss_f=Home&WT.rss_a=Allianz%27s+half+year+results+show+GWP+rise+but+profits+drop+

"Further rate increases are required in this market if the sector is to return to profitability," he explained"

http://www.datamonitor.com/store/Product/toc.aspx?productId=DMFS2495

"private motor insurance losses pushed the 2009 accident year combined operating ratio up to 122.9%"

Like I said, come back to the thread when you know anything about what is actually being discussed.