Is Protected NCD a con?

motorguy

fred246 wrote: »

People can save money by not paying to protect their no claims bonus. It's no problem to me if they want to keep giving more money than they need to insurance companies. You do wonder why they bother to use the money saving expert site though.

Funnily, the recommendation on the MoneySavingExpert site with regards to protecting your no claims is in line with what everyone else on here is saying - consider it, and do it if you feel you want to particularly if its a relatively small amount - except you...

"You can pay a small fee to protect your no-claims discount, meaning you can retain your discount even if you claim. It is worth considering, especially if you have a history of making claims. "

The problem as always with your binary advice is that if people follow it, then they could get themselves in a sticky mess down the line - either with changing a timing belt with no experience but looking up a youtube video and buying some spanners, or in this case, be out £££s if they have an accident and havent protected their no claims.

Everyones situation is different, its not binary like you portray.

But hey ho, what do you care? You get to continue your sanctimonious smugness on here yet can hide behind the anonymity of an internet user id (or two) if someone follows your advice and ends up costing them thousands. :eek:

fred246

Maybe people on this forum need to look at ways to improve their driving. If you're crashing all the time who have to ask why. For those that don't crash all the time there is no need to protect your no claims bonus.

jimbo6977

Is it a con? No.
Does it make money for the insurer? Yes.

But I think the main problem is that NCD protection is only offered by the insurer you've already chosen, rather than being subject to an open market in the same way as "legal cover" (although that product has a LOT of problems). This is probably because the insurance industry relies on the previous insurer to provide proof of NCD. Surely in the electronic age it would be possible to open the market in this area?

motorguy

fred246 wrote: »

Maybe people on this forum need to look at ways to improve their driving. If you're crashing all the time who have to ask why. For those that don't crash all the time there is no need to protect your no claims bonus.

You should start writing for MSE - "Save money by not paying for insurance and not crashing".

Joe_Horner

fred246 wrote: »

Maybe people on this forum need to look at ways to improve their driving. If you're crashing all the time who have to ask why. For those that don't crash all the time there is no need to protect your no claims bonus.

Never crashed, never claimed except for the vandal damage to windscreens last year (CCTV and getting them arrested stopped that quick enough)

But, for £3.50 a year, if something DOES happen that needs a claim, it's a pretty small investment to save several hundred over the next few years in increased premiums.

fred246

You can't argue that the insurance industry makes a fortune out of protecting NCBs and then argue that everyone benefits from paying for protection. If everyone pays for protection who wins? The insurance industry or the customers?

Mercdriver

fred246 wrote: »

Maybe people on this forum need to look at ways to improve their driving. If you're crashing all the time who have to ask why. For those that don't crash all the time there is no need to protect your no claims bonus.

Are there ways of you having to claim in spite of not being at fault? Of course there are! A claim where a customer is not held at fault is one where the insurance company is able to get 100% of the settlement from a third party.

If you and your alter ego weren't so blinkered, you'd know that there are many ways of being held 'at fault' in insurance terms, affecting your NCD when the policyholder is themselves blameless.

Scrapit

fred246 wrote: »

Maybe people on this forum need to look at ways to improve their driving. If you're crashing all the time who have to ask why. For those that don't crash all the time there is no need to protect your no claims bonus.

There aren't many that crash "all the time". Maybe save more money by only getting those that crash "all the time" to be insured. I protect my ncd cos it's the sensible thing to do.

fred990

A small price to pay for peace of mind. Car gets damaged whilst parked? I wouldn't be without protected ncd.
Aretnap neatly sums up why I do it.
Maybe if you've got very cheap insurance its different.

LandyAndy

fred990 wrote: »

A small price to pay for peace of mind. Car gets damaged whilst parked? I wouldn't be without protected ncd.
Aretnap neatly sums up why I do it.
Maybe if you've got very cheap insurance its different.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: