I Thought Car Insurance Had Gone Up

cepheus

molerat wrote: »

Why am I getting lower quotes * this year with an at fault claim added ? The insurance world has gone mad(der)

* Apart one company that want £10193.98 :eek: the next below being £1182 for a 2005 Focus. The majority are in the expected sub £200 bracket.

It has got slightly cheaper on average if only because it was very expensive last year.

Car insurance costs FALL 6% in a year, but prices are climbing for women ahead of EU rule change

The gap between the cost of insurance for men and women is closing. In March, the average male policy was 12.4% more - that has now halved to 6.1%.

raskazz

Spiderham wrote: »

Cheers dacouch that was exactly the case that I was thinking of which led me to my thoughts (and the one which was the reason I was chatting to a colleague about this very issue recently).

Yes, so in summary if the insurer requires the "other car" to be insured then if the driving other cars wording on the certificate stipulates this, the insurer can utilise this to avoid any RTA liability where the "other" car is not in fact insured.

dacouch

raskazz wrote: »

Yes, so in summary if the insurer requires the "other car" to be insured then if the driving other cars wording on the certificate stipulates this, the insurer can utilise this to avoid any RTA liability where the "other" car is not in fact insured.

I've not seen a certificate that has this legend on it, only seen it in policy wordings. Do you know any companies that print it on the certificate

mikey72

dacouch wrote: »

I've not seen a certificate that has this legend on it, only seen it in policy wordings. Do you know any companies that print it on the certificate

Axa do, with their online policies. - The policyholder may also drive with the owner's permission a car not owned by the policyholder and not hired to the policyholder under a hire purchase or annual leasing agreement and is not used in connection with the motor trade. This is provided the owner of the car has valid insurance in force on that car but which does not cover the policyholder of this Policy to drive that car.

Spiderham

raskazz wrote: »

Yes, so in summary if the insurer requires the "other car" to be insured then if the driving other cars wording on the certificate stipulates this, the insurer can utilise this to avoid any RTA liability where the "other" car is not in fact insured.

mikey72 wrote: »

Axa do, with their online policies. - The policyholder may also drive with the owner's permission a car not owned by the policyholder and not hired to the policyholder under a hire purchase or annual leasing agreement and is not used in connection with the motor trade. This is provided the owner of the car has valid insurance in force on that car but which does not cover the policyholder of this Policy to drive that car.

I know there are restrictions about what can be put on a cert too. Classic example being any licensed driver over 25 policies (nearly non-existent nowadays in private car), the cert can only stipulate any licensed driver and age restrictions don't restrict RTA liability of the insurer.

As dacouch has alluded to I believe the restrictions are generally in policy wordings and I'm unsure how enforceable they are on a cert, I'll have to dig out my copy of the RTA or some P94 Motor Insurance study text from somewhere at some point and reacquaint myself.

anniecave

I've just renewed with Tesco and it doesn't say that there has to be insurance on the other car ...