Third party insurance worth it on cars that are not worth a lot?

whitecloud663

If for example a car is worth £1k or less in the private market and the difference in cost between comprehensive insurance and third party is ~£500 with £300 voluntary excess would be be more worthwhile to just opt for the third party insurance?

For this particular scenario is there any other added benefit of having comprehensive insurance besides covering the cost of your own vehicle?

Surely regardless of third party or comprehensive, you can build your NCB with both types of policies?

Tilt

In my experience, fully comp is no where near £500 more than TPFT in fact both my cars are insured fully comp for £550 one of which is almost 15 years old.

I think it depends on the individual driver's circumstances. Not all fully comp premiums are worse value than TPFT ones. In fact I would say it's more like the reverse in the long run.

GJ_WRX

As far as I'm aware the only other benefit to fully comp (other than being able to claim for repairs to your own car in an at fault accident) is that most allow you to drive other cars with third party cover.

But you're right, not much point in spending extra on a cheap car. Always worth getting quotes for both as sometimes cheaper for fully comp.

I started third party only until i had about 3-4 years no claims then went fully comp.

fred246

When I renewed this year fully comp was cheaper than TPFT. Cost me £131. Excess is greater than value of car so not sure if it's of any benefit but it was cheaper so I went for it.

forgotmyname

Whilst looking for my daughter, 3rd party came out £400 MORE than comprehensive.

If its a cheap vehicle that you wont claim for then up the excess on the comparison sites. Sometimes going too high increases the premium.

Some will allow £1000 excess and reduces the price a lot.

InsideInsurance

Benefits of Comp over TPFT traditionally are:

Glass cover
Personal Possessions, though often only a token £100 or so
Personal Accident, small compensation for major injury (loss of limb etc) irrespective of fault

As others have said, due to negative selection and difference in market competition TPFT is often more expensive than Comp for a low risk driver with a mid level excess

If you say your car is worth less than £1k then I wouldnt be paying an extra £500/year just to get comp cover over TPFT but its unclear from your original post if this is what you meant.

colino

If the car is imaginary, why insure at all?

EssexExile

Third party on my van £120, fully comp £250. As mentioned above the only downside is I don't get cover for driving other cars.

Spicy_McHaggis

whitecloud663 wrote: »

If for example a car is worth £1k or less in the private market and the difference in cost between comprehensive insurance and third party is ~£500 with £300 voluntary excess would be be more worthwhile to just opt for the third party insurance?

For this particular scenario is there any other added benefit of having comprehensive insurance besides covering the cost of your own vehicle?

Surely regardless of third party or comprehensive, you can build your NCB with both types of policies?

Surely at your age you've already built up full no claims or is this for your son 40k M3?

InsideInsurance

EssexExile wrote: »

Third party on my van £120, fully comp £250. As mentioned above the only downside is I don't get cover for driving other cars.

A fair number of comp policies no longer have DOC either.

Glass cover can be of value, depending on how expensive your windscreen is to replace, but again some comp policies have stripped this out too. Having seen the price of replacing my car's screen and its propensity for getting chips its not a cover I'd be wanting to skip

redux

On the few occasions I've asked or checked online I haven't seen more than about £8 saving available by having 3PFT only.