We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Ridiculous car insurance quotes!!
Comments
-
I wasn't any better or worse than a young driver now, but I had a much bigger, faster car than any young driver could afford to insure now.
(My first car was twin carb 1725cc Hillman Hunter, so the equivalent of a Vectra, not a Corsa, then I had a kit car with a declared supercharger when I was under 21 that had reasonable insurance costs as a student)
I strongly doubt it.
What, you doubt I was young, you doubt I was better or worse, or you doubt a twin carb 1725cc Hillman Hunter was a big fast car in the day, or is it a just general doubt of the statement in general with no specific basis on any fact you could be aware of.
Or is it a philosophical doubt of the existence of the world around you if it doesn't conform to your views in general?0 -
Harry_Flashman wrote: »Probably true.
It would be much fairer if there was a national insurance scheme rahter than those driven by profit.
Please do some rudimentary research before posting. The motor insurance market as a whole makes no profit on the young driver sector. If you think that our ludicrously inefficient public sector could cater for motor insurance more cheaply than the market then you are in fairy land.
Those calling for insurers to work with the Government appear to be ignorant of the fact that they already do. The ABI has consistently called for reform of young driver licensing. As recently as last week they published this press release:
http://www.abi.org.uk/Media/Releases/2010/10/Public_backs_call_for_minimum_one_year_learning_period_for_young_drivers.aspx
“Too many young drivers are still killed or seriously injured on our roads. A car is a potential lethal weapon, and we must provide more help to young motorists to better deal with the dangers of driving. A minimum one year learning period, and young driver passenger restrictions, would help ensure that today’s young drivers become tomorrow’s safer motorists”.
I stongly agree with this. Under the current licensing system youngsters in this country do not learn to be good drivers, they learn to pass a test and get a licence.
Insurers are also working towards telematics to more accurately price young driver risks, by disincentivising driving at night-time.
The only thing that will lower premiums for young drivers if if the risk they present is reduced, both in terms of accident frequency and accident severity. The Government, insurers, young drivers and their parents all have a role to play in this.
As an aside, readers might want to read the below, a very enlightening paper published last year.
http://www.equalities.gov.uk/pdf/The%20use%20of%20age-based%20practices%20in%20financial%20services%20Final%20report.pdf
"If there is a bias in the pricing, this works in favour of the youngest drivers" (p.43)0 -
So, in 2005, payouts were about 75% of insurance premiums on average from your figures.
Apart from 17 and 18 year olds, where it was about 105%.
So 19 + is a fair risk, and shouldn't be subject to huge loadings, and 17 year olds need to bring in about a third as much again as other drivers to put them in line with the rest of the market?
In 2006 and 2007 losses went down to 100%, so young drivers were either getting more careful, or premiums were dearer, and as I can't remember prices shooting up then........, so if it's a trend......
And while you're here, rememberNot every company does the same. I know of at least 2 insurers who will offer a renewal customer a cheaper rate than a new business customer (all other things being equal).
Still waiting for you to name them.0 -
So 19 + is a fair risk, and shouldn't be subject to huge loadings
Are you implying that there have been no changes in competition, renewal retention, expenses, claim frequency and severity since 2005 (not to mention solvency requirements and investment return)?
With regard to the differential between the data in the report from 2005 and the data from 2006-2007, there are quite a few reasons why you would expect them to differ; primarily because (a) the 2006-2007 data is not aggregate data but only a sample of around 25% of the market and (b) those years, at the time of publication, had not fully developed and recent claim inflation would imply that the loss ratios charted for 2006-2007 will understate the true results once those years had fully run-off (that's why that chart is labeled as being based on estimates).Still waiting for you to name them.
Advantage, Equity Red Star, some Chaucer schemes. There are probably quite a few more.0 -
Are you implying that there have been no changes in competition, renewal retention, expenses, claim frequency and severity since 2005 (not to mention solvency requirements and investment return)?
No. I'm using the source you quoted to show the glaring holes in your argument.
If you are now admitting your source is 5 years out of date, and no longer realistic, maybe you should retract it.
Advantage, Equity Red Star, some Chaucer schemes. There are probably quite a few more.
Don't think the posts on here back you up somehow.0 -
No. I'm using the source you quoted to show the glaring holes in your argument.
If you are now admitting your source is 5 years out of date, and no longer realistic, maybe you should retract it.
If all other things were equal to 2005, yes, you could say that premiums would have to be increased only for younger drivers. But all other things are not equal. In fact they are dramatically different. Maybe you should retract your nonsense posts? Maybe you should stop talking out of your backside? Maybe you should read the notes to the figures on the report I linked to? Maybe, maybe...Don't think the posts on here back you up somehow.
Link me to these posts please, specifically in relation to the above insurers.0 -
Maybe you should stop talking out of your backside!
Is it a common trait for brokers to lack good manners when they run out of anything useful or indeed factual to post?
I have merely re-posted the figures you used to justify your first post, which you yourself then nonsensed in your subsequent post.
I pointed out this fact, your resort to insults?0 -
Is it a common trait for brokers to lack good manners when they run out of anything useful or indeed factual to post?
I think it probably is in my experience. I, however, am not a broker.I have merely re-posted the figures you used to justify your first post, which you yourself then nonsensed in your subsequent post.
I pointed out this fact, your resort to insults?
You have not 'merely re-posted them'! You have drawn an invalid inference from them, because you seemingly (a) did not understand the difference between the two sets of data in the report (see my post above) and (b) cannot place the data in the report in the context of changes in the latter half of the last decade in terms of claim inflation, customer churn, competition, expenses, investment returns and solvency requirements.
And while you're here, remember:Don't think the posts on here back you up somehow.
Still waiting for you to link to them in relation to the insurers I mentioned.0 -
I think you're missing out competition (or lack of it) from your figures. The insurance industry seem to play very much in each others' pockets.
It never ceases to surprise me how many different 'brand name' insurers are actually the same company.0 -
You have not 'merely re-posted them'! You have drawn an invalid inference from them, because you seemingly (a) did not understand the difference between the two sets of data in the report (see my post above) and (b) cannot place the data in the report in the context of changes in the latter half of the last decade in terms of claim inflation, customer churn, competition, expenses, investment returns and solvency requirements.
Good edit, but if even you admit the estimates the report makes cannot be relied on, what does that imply for the rest of the reports conclusions?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards