75ZT Community

i'm leaving swiftcover after a few years as they have put up the cost to much.... fair to say resent years with both bev and i cars have looked at many oh so many insurance places even tried mr fluk a few times but never got that certain deal..... so to save £116 i'm going with admiral . even tried the classic place that does bev's car in hinckley but they don't think a 75 is classic... the bar-stools given over 6 months of mostly 4 day weeks saving money is very high priority....

Renewals always seem to be ripoffs nowadays. For me, Swiftcover was £390 last year and the renewal came through earlier this month... £498!

So, I switched to Churchill for £389. And I can now say that my insurance went down from last year (even if it was only by a quid!)

Seems to me there is a fortune available to an Insurer who will provide only the cover that is important to drivers. There are several included compulsorily insured risks that are not necessarily required, either to comply with the law, very rarely asked for by proposers, or even known about. They often tend to be just accepted rather than asked for. In the event of an accident I might not require a hotel, a hire car, luggage cover, pernicious (sorry, personal view being expressed there) Approved Repairer charges being made for complete bumpers being required at £1000 when a £100 paint job is sufficient, thereby pushing the 'value' of the car to write-off point.
There is a lot of interest lately in false claims for injuries following car accidents, but that obviously is not damage to the car. Why not treat it as what it is - Personal Accident Liability - separate from the car cover and covered by a ridiculously cheap Liability policy at say, £30 per year, thereby removing the car Insurer's only defence? The main reason for these claims is the proactive solicitor knowing that the Insurer will pay, just to avoid drawn out court action, and then charge the policyholder anyway!
There is also a built-in practice with Insurer's that disadvantages the policyholder. Take Household Insurance. My 'Buildings' are covered for up to £500,000. In the event of a total loss together with alternative accomodation, all fees to rebuild etc the total cost would be no more than £250,000. I don't think double that figure is a gift from a benevolent insurance company, yet I have no choice! The same things apply to motor insurance and these practices load our costs beyond reasonableness.
All that is needed is a menu for the cover needed, all exceptions in LARGE PRINT on the first page.

fully comp isn't these days......

I have been informed you only need "road traffic act" insurance, available at some insurers as the bare minimum, all it covers is damage to other vehicles etc nothing for you or your car, the bare legal minimum.

Dodo wrote:I have been informed you only need "road traffic act" insurance, available at some insurers as the bare minimum, all it covers is damage to other vehicles etc nothing for you or your car, the bare legal minimumo

I believe that's what used to be known as third party only. Problem is sometimes it's actually more expensive than fully (not)comprehensive.

It seems almost impossible to get good old fashioned TP or TPF&T these days at a sensible price. I presume that this is because most of the cost to insurers is in TP injury claims, with many of those claims being down right fraudulent.
Oh, and don't forget that about 10% of drivers aren't even insured so we have to pay for them as well.
The whole motor insurance business is a total mess.
It really annoys me to see ridiculous repair sums paid out when we all know what can be achieved with secondhand parts and paint.

bertie wrote:It really annoys me to see ridiculous repair sums paid out when we all know what can be achieved with secondhand parts and paint.

Perhaps we are in the minority, we know some parts are difficult to obtain and therefore s/h ones are ok if it gets us mobile.

However, there is normally a warranty with car repairs so this could cause a problem using s/h parts.

I can remember many years ago taking a car for an estimate and the question being asked 'is this insurance or private', presumably insurance would be more expensive than private!

A few years back Yve had a bump and I took her car to the repairers. I was asked the question 'does she want it repaired or written off'. Something wrong there.

As for uninsured drivers, if it is 10% it would seem that the ANPR cameras are not really effective. Added to the fine received for no insurance means it is more economic to pay the fine than get insured. The penalty points mean nothing because they will carry on driving without insurance.

Hmmm, Question;

If you choose third party insurance only, why should your post code matter?

I just took out a policy with a different insurer, and one of the things I spotted was they may use 'recycled' or no OE parts if the quality is acceptable.

I guess they get to choose, but maybe there is hope?

takestock wrote:Hmmm, Question;

If you choose third party insurance only, why should your post code matter?

What have thought statistics - a person from one post code is more likely to be the guilty party in a crash, hence the insurer paying out, than from another post code

I think "Road Traffic act" insurance only covers for injuries to others not damage to other cars, that is 3rd party?

The postcode loading is ridiculous, you may live in a leafy, suburban area with a postcode to match, say a nice Cheshire postcode with light local traffic. However your daily journey to say Manchester will take you through some really dodgy postcode areas with lots of other road users, like Moss Side and Hulme.

Rover418275 wrote:The postcode loading is ridiculous, you may live in a leafy, suburban area with a postcode to match, say a nice Cheshire postcode with light local traffic. However your daily journey to say Manchester will take you through some really dodgy postcode areas with lots of other road users, like Moss Side and Hulme.

It will say, presumably, that on average, a person living in the Cheshire area is less likely to have an accident than one who lives in Moss Side. Otherwise you would have a huge form to complete stating every location that you WILL be driving through (crystal ball time).

There are other things that they take in to account, driving history, occupation, criminal convictions etc so it is not just on post code. How else would companies economically calculate a premium if not by statistics calculating the risk - apparently esure would not insure Michael Winner if he applied because he is in the entertainment business and they will not insure those people.

There are other ridiculous things - if my car was left hand drive then I would be loaded. However, half of my driving is in France where I will be (if I remember ) be driving on the other side of the road.