I'm 65 and car insurance has gone up from £329 to £1040!!

Mikeyorks

student_84 wrote: »

Remember to use cashback sites to minimise the cost of your insurance!

But only after you've used the comparison sites first. Just use cashback sites - and you'll more than likely pay - net - well over the odds. Cashback deals never work out the best for either my car (2) / house or holiday insurances.

lilac_lady

What kind of car do you have? If it's a Ferrari, the insurance could be a bargain!

student_84

Mikeyorks wrote: »

But only after you've used the comparison sites first. Just use cashback sites - and you'll more than likely pay - net - well over the odds. Cashback deals never work out the best for either my car (2) / house or holiday insurances.

An earlier post had pointed to using comparison sites, mine was an add on to minimise the cost of the insurance. Since there are a range of insurers the chances are that a good deal found via comparison can be made sweeter with cashback.

vaio

I do my dear old dad’s for him, he’s late seventies now and for the last five years it’s cost somewhere between £100 & £175 apart from one year when pru (I think) were doing £75 cashback which brought it down to £75 for the year.

He drives a valueless Fiesta and I generally find that fully comp but with an excess that makes it effectively TPFT works out the cheapest.

Strangely adding additional younger drivers (as in mere 50 year olds) doesn’t seem to reduce it and just for fun I tried to add him to my car (group 20 S4), the number of firms willing to quote plummeted and those that did wanted a hugely (like x 10 or 20) increased premium.

He hits 80 next year so we’ll see what happens then

pedro123456

lolly, over 65, under 65 makes no odds to the Insurance companies, they are trying to have your pants down as they do every renewal for everyone every year, with claims and without claims, dont take it personally its just what they do...................makes them more money you see

StephenMarsh

pedro123456 wrote: »

lolly, over 65, under 65 makes no odds to the Insurance companies, they are trying to have your pants down as they do every renewal for everyone every year, with claims and without claims, dont take it personally its just what they do...................makes them more money you see

yes of course they are

As someone mentioned at 65 you probbaly dont fit into there target market any more. Plenty of companies that will not have a problem with 65 so just shop around. Ive found 75 is probably an age that things become a bit harder as more insurers seem to not want this age bracket and above.

macman

OP, if you are male, have you tried putting the policy in your wife/partner's name, and yourself as the second named on the policy? Women drivers will generally attract lower premiums, everything else being equal. A 65th birthday should really not trigger any increase, so I suspect it's just the huge rise that everyone is facing this year, regardless of age-a 25% hike seems fairly typical, if you don't negotiate.
Have you tried SAGA?

lisyloo

OP, if you are male, have you tried putting the policy in your wife/partner's name, and yourself as the second named on the policy?

Do you mean making them the main driver?
If they are not actually the main driver then this is called fronting and that is bad.
If you mean the partner being the policyholder but the male being the main driver, then they might not save any money as I suspect the cost is assocaited with the main driver and not the policyholder.

You can change the policyholder at will with most companies if you are married.
But you have to accurately state the main driver always, unless you just so happen to drive 50/50 but this is not generally the case.

I work very clsoe to my huisband and we commute in the same car, so we are a 50/50 case, but it's quite unusual for people to do exactly the same journeys.

macman

Yes, I do. If the OP is 65 then I assume that they are retired and both drive the car.
I'm well aware of what fronting is, but it usually applies when parents are named as the main drivers when their kids actually drive or own the cars and the vehicle is often not even kept overnight at that address because the kids may live elsewhere.
Slightly different to a retired couple who both use the car. My wife and I share a car, but I've never worked out in any detail who does the most mileage in a year for insurance purposes. I can see nothing in my suggestion that would make the policy void on the basis of fraudulent information.
This is totally hypothetical anyway, as we don't know the OP's gender, or whether they even have a partner!

lisyloo

but it usually applies when parents are named as the main drivers when their kids actually drive or own the cars

I agree that's the usual use.
But ANY false declaration in order to save money would be wrong.

I wasn't suggesting that you were suggesting something bad, just clarfying it, hence starting with a question :-)

Slightly different to a retired couple who both use the car.

It's a different scenario, but if it was incorrect and being done to save money, I believe it would still be fronting, although much less liekly to be investigated than the obvious parent/child case.

My wife and I share a car, but I've never worked out in any detail who does the most mileage in a year for insurance purposes.

I don't think it's based on mileage.
So if say one of you used the car 5 days a week for 10 miles.
An the other did 51 on a saturday, then I think the person that did 5 journeys would be considered the main driver although slightly lower mileage.
I don't know exact definitions, so if in doubt check with the insurer/broker, but I don't think it's jsut based on mileage.

I can see nothing in my suggestion that would make the policy void on the basis of fraudulent information.

IF (and that's a big if) the information was fradulent then I believe they could void a policy and/or claim (as long as it's wasn't a statutory obligation to a 3rd party under the road traffic act).
Again I am not accusing you of suggesting fraud.
If a policy is cancelled in this way it would have to be declared forever which causes big problems getting insurance in future.

This is totally hypothetical anyway, as we don't know the OP's gender, or whether they even have a partner!

Absolutely. They could also be in a single-sex partnership, so no gender advantage from switching.