Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Car Insurance.

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Middlesex
    Posts
    8,509

    Default

    I think that is a nonsensical response. I see no risk to the insurer in the event of Third Party cover. That would only make sense if Comprehensive still had the relative higher price than TP only. Who could possibly think that they are saving money by paying more for less cover. Stupid man!!!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    2,435

    Default

    Well - logical insurance company seems to be an oxymoron.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Nearly all insurers have for years been losing money on underwriting motor insurance, and have only remained profitable due to the referral fees from lawyers, accident managers, etc.

    Since TP cover does not generate any of that income, it is unlikely to be profitable, and they set their prices to discourage it.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    8,331

    Default

    It used to be that fully comp was more expensive, as the insurance company used to organise everything for you, if you were involved in a an accident, and gave you better cover.

    Third party was always cheaper, and was only mentioned on your policy to tell you that you only had TP when you drove someone else's car.

    It seems that a lot has changed since those days?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    8,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hometune View Post
    Direct Line house insurance was 320 after 12 years with no claim ever made, never ever. Saga 118 for identical cover - yes checked the small print and the excesses - so if that is not as close to legal fraud as you can get, I don't know what is.

    To answer Smudger, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is supposed to police this now.
    Funny, that! We had our home and contents insured with Saga. When our renewal premium arrived for March last year, although no claims had been made or anything changed in the schedule or any alterations to the property that could change the risk, it jumped to exactly double that for the previous year. A telephone query brought no explanation and a rather snotty response. We changed, of course, to a different insurer and their premium was around the expected figure.
    Hometune, if the above figure of 118 is your first premium for the policy, watch out for it being low for the purpose of attracting new business, and keep an eye on it at renewal time. As our premium last year was for a new policy, I am hoping that it was not "massaged" to attract business.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    612

    Default

    [QUOTE=Beelzebub;116682]Nearly all insurers have for years been losing money on underwriting motor insurance, and have only remained profitable due to the referral fees from lawyers, accident managers, etc.

    I have questioned this passing on accident claims onto the ambulance chasers and my insurer denies this is done but could not explain how they got my details including phone number

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    8,331

    Default

    Quote.......​watch out for it being low for the attracting new business.

    Even if that is true, all you have to do is change companies every year, that way you get a good deal every year.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    7,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    Hometune, if the above figure of 118 is your first premium for the policy, watch out for it being low for the purpose of attracting new business, and keep an eye on it at renewal time.
    Yes, learned my lesson now and wont be lazy and let it go.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    8,279

    Default

    I don't think this is down to laziness, Hometune. What should be the case (and what we are learning on a daily basis is not the case), is that we should be able to accept these insurers as creditably honourable business people, who would not exploit customers by blatant acts of trying to rip them off.
    having taken on that trust, now that you have been let down, like myself and many others, you will now probably view all insurance quotes with a degree of cynicism.

    Smudger, it isn't so easy for us to change our house insurance to other companies, as our house was underpinned around 1984/85.
    some companies will not offer insurance, whilst others, including Saga, imposed a higher excess in the case of subsidence. Our current insurer, on hearing that there had been no further problems after nearly 30 years, applied the standard excess of the first 1,000.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    7,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    I don't think this is down to laziness, Hometune. What should be the case (and what we are learning on a daily basis is not the case), is that we should be able to accept these insurers as creditably honourable business people, who would not exploit customers by blatant acts of trying to rip them off.
    Yes, I called that fraud earlier.

    having taken on that trust, now that you have been let down, like myself and many others, you will now probably view all insurance quotes with a degree of cynicism.
    Absolutely!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •