Insurance Renewal

Gavin_C

vaio wrote: »

But surely if you are considering none comprehensive insurance than that implies your car & circumstances are such that you wouldn't make a claim for it on your policy?

In which case the size of the excess doesn't matter other than to alter it to minimise the premium?

I'm sorry, but I am not finding it easy to follow your logic here.

What I was trying to say was in the first part of my post which you missed off in the quote.

i.e. "If you want to save money, don't rule out any option without first looking into what it actually means"

In a cost-benefit analysis I would always opt for fully comp. insurance if it was no more expensive than TPFT cover (and the excess remained the same).

Of course if I had bought cover and a reason to claim on that purchased cover occurred, I would claim.

In the OP's instance, it really doesn't make much sense to have fully comp cover on a vehicle worth £800 with £1000 excess (but don't rule it out until all the options have also been explored).

In my case, I would have taken the fully comp cover as it was the same price as TPFT if the excess remained the same.

Whilst my vehicle is worth £2k, I would be prepared to take the hit as to repair/replacement costs if I am to blame for the loss, but if I had purchased insurance cover, of course I would make a claim if covered.

However, if the vehicle was stolen (and not recovered) I would prefer to get £1950 back under TPFT cover rather than just £1500 if fully comp.

Hence, my decision was to take TPFT in the end.

lisyloo

Of course if I had bought cover and a reason to claim on that purchased cover occurred, I would claim.

For savvy people this isn't true.
If you were savvy you could compare the costs of claiminig and not claiming.
So for example if it cost you £1000 over the next 5 years for increased premums and loos of NCD and the damage was £500, then you should repair the car yourself. Future premiums can of course only be estimated but you can play with quotes to see the affect of claims and loss of NCD to get an approximation.

it really doesn't make much sense to have fully comp cover on a vehicle worth £800 with £1000 excess

It does if it saves money on the premium.
It's counter-intuitive but often fullt comp is cheaper than 3rd parties, it's just an anomaly of the pricing models sometimes.

but if I had purchased insurance cover, of course I would make a claim if covered.

Even if the increased costs in future (loss of NCD, premium loadings) are more than the claim itself?
That doesn't make sense to me.

I would prefer to get £1950 back under TPFT cover rather than just £1500 if fully comp.

Be a bit careful here.
There are usually several excesses on a policy.
Normally £0 for third party claims, a different one for fully comp, often ones for drivers under 25 or not parking your car in the garage.
Not sure about fire and theft, but there are definitely different excesses for different scenarios.
Make sure you are applying the right excess. I could be wrong, but I'd question what you have said above.