Old car - low value - impossible to replace

Quote

It was the idea that you make the decision to insure your car, as opposed to it being the law. Is your home insured just for fire?

rev_henry

I thought this was a non fault accident? Don't you have the 3rd party's details?

Ialwaysgetdone

Norfolk_Jim wrote: »

It means I cover myself for things that I could not cope with, like a big claim against me, or my house burns down.

You see, while the insurance claims to protect you from all kinds of really quite modest losses - your problems begin when you claim with loss of NCB, increasing premiums and wo betide you if you claim several times - loss of cover altogether.

If you sit down and work out if claiming for a wing mirror (for example) is worth it, after excess deducted, a lot of the time I'll end up paying more in increased premiums than I'll get back from my claim.

So I want insurance that covers me in the event of something big. As such I accept a high or very high excess, because I wont claim unless its a big claim or beyond my means to deal with it

OP states car is old - so will have a very low book value. Will probably get next to nothing for the claim but might end up with costs like loss of NCB or increased premiums

hope thats a bit clearer for you

I see what you're saying. I had a repair done after a big stone dented my cill. I got it done and paid for it because my excess was £250 and I knew this was going to be less than that. However, if it had been more, like say £350 I still might have paid it anyway as my premiums would have gone up with a claim

vikingaero

This is a problem faced by many people with old cars which are in remarkable condition and mileage. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but drivers who value their cars should insure it under an agreed value policy - essentially a value high enough to repair it if it is totalled.

My Mum had a 1994 Mercedes W124 E320E from new. It had covered only 30k and was not even fully run it. It was totalled by a van driver and written off. The van drivers insurance paid our insurer £2,300. My Mum and Dads motor policy paid out £35k to Mum because they had a premium policy with Chubb that paid out the value of the car at invoice - essentially a glorified GAP policy.

The car could have been repaired but they elected to buy a new car rather than have the niggly problems that sometimes accompany a repaired car.

Norfolk_Jim

I never see any of those policies come up on the price comparison sites, LOL

Where would you find that kind of cover? Back of classic car mags? Specialist broker? I dont personaly need to know but It's not beyond reason to think this thread will pull a few views from those who would benefit from cover like that.

mikey72

Footman James, Adrian Flux do these. Difficult to get an agreed value if it's not a classic car, but not impossible.
We have a classic policy, third party though, with an agreed value, so that's going to be interesting if someone else writes it off.

lisyloo

I don't see that this will help at all I'm afraid.
I used to have an old reliable car.
The problem is not the financial value, it's the worth you place on knowing the history and having a "good one".
This is not reflected in financial values.
It has a value that goes beyond the quantitive financial which cannot be replaced.

Dangermac

mikey72 wrote: »

Footman James, Adrian Flux do these. Difficult to get an agreed value if it's not a classic car, but not impossible.
We have a classic policy, third party though, with an agreed value, so that's going to be interesting if someone else writes it off.

It wont be that interesting. Legally you are entitled to be returned to the same financial position as you enjoyed before the incident.

The fact that you have decided to insure for an agreed value, and the insurer have accepted the risk, is no concern of a 3rd party, and wouldnt affect how they would deal with compensating you in the event of an incident.

With the above paragraph in mind, it seems that you have a pretty wide hole in your insurance arrangements.

DM