Is it wrong to charge higher premiums to victims of car and traffic crime

Bryinwim

Interesting thoughts Quentin...

I believe introducing a third 'victim' claim category (which is the tick of a box, so not really additional admin), would differentiate victims of random criminal offences to claimants who make claims due to causing an accident through bad driving. Statistically if you make a claim due to driver error yes I agree you are more likely to make another claim due to driver error. But to be lumped into this category it distorts statistic.
Also we have no claims protection so this did not effect our additional premium costs.

dunstonh

Insurance is priced on statistics. A good proportion of those that were driven into will not be 100% blameless in respect of prevention of accident. They could have parked in a place that was not prohibited but not a good place to park. Or parked at a bad angle. When driving, another car may drive into you but you may have lacked awareness and not been able to take preventative action.

Statistically, those that have an incident, are more likely to have another within a relatively short period.

Bryinwim

Rude kid 48... Simply put I understand your comments but disagree...you claim you pay more...but not 40% and not being told it's an 'at fault' claim..this is misleading of the circumstances...
Yes they are commercial entities but they are standardised and should be acting fairly...40% increases are unjust.

FutureGirl

The premium wouldn't have gone up 40% just due to the claim.

New policies came into effect as of last month meaning all insurance policies would raise anyway. Add to that the raise of the base policy cost, and the reduction in NCD due to the claim.

Bryinwim

Unfortunately this was due to the claim, as I had one quote / renewal price and once informed of my wife's claim (the one mentioned above it then went up 40%... So directly effected by the so called 'at fault' claim...people will say why not just shop around...my point is insurance companies are regulated as a financial body and therefore should be acting in a reasonable and responsible way...over charging in my eyes due to incorrectly categorising incidents. Which seems to be an industry standard and just because it is the way it's is currently carried out does not make it right or the best solution.

Quentin

It maybe your insurer doesn't "like" anyone with a claim in their history. Hence the increase.

But you misunderstand the powers of the regulators. They cannot interfere over business decisions like premiums.

If you don't like the price follow the mse guide and get shopping round.

magpiecottage

I think the simple answer if you feel that your insurer is being unreasonable in determining the premium it wishes to charge on renewal is to shop around.

dunstonh

my point is insurance companies are regulated as a financial body and therefore should be acting in a reasonable and responsible way

They are.

.over charging in my eyes due to incorrectly categorising incidents.

You are not privy to the pricing models and risks and are not in a position to say whether they are over charging or not.

Which seems to be an industry standard

No its not. Some do, some dont. They all have their own pricing models.

just because it is the way it's is currently carried out does not make it right or the best solution.

if you dont like it, then start your own insurance company.

rudekid48

Bryinwim wrote: »

Rude kid 48... Simply put I understand your comments but disagree...you claim you pay more...but not 40% and not being told it's an 'at fault' claim..this is misleading of the circumstances...
Yes they are commercial entities but they are standardised and should be acting fairly...40% increases are unjust.

How are they standardised? Pricing is neither standardised or regulated, as I said these are commercial entities and free to price as they see fit. The price is only an offer - you are not forced to accept it you can shop around.

Why is 40% unjust? If an annual premium was £1,000 but a claim of £5,000 was paid out, what would be a justified increase in your eyes?

GwylimT

Having a third called victim would still need an adjoining class of fault or non-fault, so it wouldn't make any difference to premiums. Its about the cost to your insurance company, if you don't want your premium to rise don't claim.