Car insurance - cosmetic - bumps & scratches

Quentin

Alter_ego wrote: »

Why the quotes round legal? Do you mean it's not?

Nothing on my policy excludes scratches.

"Legal" as in there is no reason why you cannot take out cosmetic car insurance if you also have comprehensive cover on your car insurance


(You wouldn't want to claim off your normal policy for a little wear and tear scratch - think excess/loss of NCD etc)

InsideInsurance

Quentin wrote: »

Your normal insurance doesn't cover wear and tear scratches etc

Scratches would never be considered wear and tear and are covered by your normal insurance.

The issue is that its one claim per incident and so if you live in an area with some delightful teenagers who kill time by keying vehicles you cannot "save up" a few incidents of it and put it in as a single claim.

Now some people will try to do so but one thing engineers are normally asked to check is that the "age" of the damage is consistent with the stated date of loss

Quentin

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Scratches would never be considered wear and tear and are covered by your normal insurance.

This thread is discussing cosmetic insurance (small scratches and chips etc) that normal people refer to as wear and tear


No-one would use up NCD over claiming a "cosmetic repair" on their own insurance. (Cosmetic repair only covers small scratches - usually less than 15cm!)

Alter_ego

Quentin wrote: »

No-one would use up NCD over claiming a "cosmetic repair" on their own insurance. (Cosmetic repair only covers small scratches - usually less than 15cm!)

I'v just read through Gloomendoom's link in an earlier post. You might like to read the last paragraph with the policy adopted by LV (coincidentally my insurance company)

Quentin

Alter_ego wrote: »

I'v just read through Gloomendoom's link in an earlier post. You might like to read the last paragraph with the policy adopted by LV (coincidentally my insurance company)

The paragraph refers to the condition that all car insurance contains regarding reporting all incidents to your insurer.

What is your point?

Alter_ego

Quentin wrote: »

The paragraph refers to the condition that all car insurance contains regarding reporting all incidents to your insurer.

What is your point?

Er no, the paragraph refers to accident, incident or CLAIM involving your car. THe heading is "Tell your ins co about cosmetic claims?"

MY point is obvious.

Quentin

How is it an obvious point?

It is written in all motor policies.

Are you saying we should report every scratch we polish out?

You can if you want to.

Alter_ego

Quentin wrote: »

How is it an obvious point?

It is written in all motor policies.

Are you saying we should report every scratch we polish out?

You can if you want to.

I am pointing out that LV (probably others as well) require that any claim involving your car must be reported to them. That does not exclude cosmetic claims on another policy.
As you must be aware, if insurance companies know of something they will find a way to make money from it.

InsideInsurance

Quentin wrote: »

This thread is discussing cosmetic insurance (small scratches and chips etc) that normal people refer to as wear and tear

No-one would use up NCD over claiming a "cosmetic repair" on their own insurance. (Cosmetic repair only covers small scratches - usually less than 15cm!)

May be common parlance but from an Insurance perspective it isnt wear and tear and so is covered.

People do use NCD up over these sorts of claims, or possibly more commonly NCD Protection "lives", though I agree that no one sensible/ in the know would do so.

I've seen many claims ultimately declined because the total cost was below their £200 excess etc even at main dealer prices and not the bumps & scuffs type cheap repair places

AdrianC

It's quite simple.

The vendors of this top-up policy aim to make a profit from what's left of the premium money, after paying out all claims and their admin and marketing costs.

Do you really want to be SO far behind the average that your claims are so much higher than average that you'll be better off buying the policy than not? If you think you will be, wouldn't it make sense to remove the hassle by finding better parking arrangements?