We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
The MSE Forum Team would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas. However, we know this time of year can be difficult for some. If you're struggling during the festive period, here's a list of organisations that might be able to help
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Has MSE helped you to save or reclaim money this year? Share your 2025 MoneySaving success stories!
Protected no claims discount
Comments
-
No.But are we not being conned into buying something on the premise that the premium will not go up ?
Nice simple illustration...
Without the claim, let's say your premium would have been £640. You get a 50% discount, so you pay £320.
With the claim and protected NCB, you are a higher risk. Your premium is now £1,400. But you still get a 50% discount, so you pay £700.
With the claim, but without protected NCB, your premium would still be £1,400 - but you would get no discount, so you would pay £1,400.
The moral of the story is not to drive into things. Insurers don't like people who do that.0 -
No.
Nice simple illustration...
Without the claim, let's say your premium would have been £640. You get a 50% discount, so you pay £320.
With the claim and protected NCB, you are a higher risk. Your premium is now £1,400. But you still get a 50% discount, so you pay £700.
With the claim, but without protected NCB, your premium would still be £1,400 - but you would get no discount, so you would pay £1,400.
The moral of the story is not to drive into things. Insurers don't like people who do that.
As far as I am aware the discount is not on 100% of the premium anyway, just certain part/parts of it.0 -
The moral of the story is not to drive into things. Insurers don't like people who do that.
They don't like people who leave their car where other people can drive into it either
I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....
(except air quality and Medical Science)0 -
As already said - the clue is in the name:
Protected No Claims Discount (Bonus)
You're protecting the % discount, not the overall premium.
Otherwise they'd be advertising it as - One Free ClaimMortgage remaining: £42,260 of £77,000 (2.59% til 03/18 - 2.09% til 03/23)
Savings target June 18 - £22,281.99 / £25,0000 -
Hi , I ended up paying £400 with AA0
-
No.
Nice simple illustration...
Without the claim, let's say your premium would have been £640. You get a 50% discount, so you pay £320.
With the claim and protected NCB, you are a higher risk. Your premium is now £1,400. But you still get a 50% discount, so you pay £700.
With the claim, but without protected NCB, your premium would still be £1,400 - but you would get no discount, so you would pay £1,400.
The moral of the story is not to drive into things. Insurers don't like people who do that.
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yes of course its a con. You have paid extra to protect your No Claims Discount at 50%, paying £320. You have an accident and your premium is now £700 it has gone up 120% because you made a claim.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Your premium went up because you made a claim therefore your No Claims discount has not been protected at all even though you paid extra for it in the 1st place.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The insurance co telling you "but it would have been £1,400" it just a further twist to the con to try and convince you that you still have 50% NCD even though you premium has more than doubled.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]As you have demonstrated £1,400 is 250% more than you needed to pay.[/FONT]0 -
Just as a point of interest , I didn't drive into anything . I live out in the sticks and on my way to work one morning a deer jumped over a hedge straight onto my car bonnet . So although it was not my fault , it was my fault because the insurers could not claim off the deer .0
-
To insurers, there's no difference at all. Your policy cost them money.Just as a point of interest , I didn't drive into anything . I live out in the sticks and on my way to work one morning a deer jumped over a hedge straight onto my car bonnet . So although it was not my fault , it was my fault because the insurers could not claim off the deer .0 -
Just as a point of interest , I didn't drive into anything . I live out in the sticks and on my way to work one morning a deer jumped over a hedge straight onto my car bonnet . So although it was not my fault , it was my fault because the insurers could not claim off the deer .
Oh deer...0 -
To insurers, there's no difference at all. Your policy cost them money.
As has been said, its based on risk.
Age, Location , Car, years driving , number of accidents etc etc.
Protected No claims is proabably just a way of getting more money out of you. If you protect or not protect does it change your risk profile ???? I would argue that someone who does not protect their no claims believes they won't have an accident ?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 246K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards