protected no claims discount
Discussion
popeyewhite said:
You're really struggling with the opinion thing aren't you.
Not in the slightest. It's an opinion formed from ignorance - what more is there to say?You've already proved you don't understand how an NCD works or why it's used, so any opinions formed from that position are clearly fundamentally flawed.
There are loads of things I know nothing about - maybe even some topics where you actually do know something - if I was to state my opinions on those topics, you could rightly point out that I'm talking nonsense (if that was the case) on the basis of my flawed knowledge or ignorance of the topic.
No idea why I'd bother to do that, hence I'm unsure why you choose to do the same here - it does seem to happen a lot with Finance threads though.
Edited by sidicks on Monday 27th February 22:43
Peace guys....please
thanks for the great amount of info
I get
if insurance companies can s...w you they will
your risk goes up, hence your premium will after a fault claim
NCD will reduce the premium by a certain %- less so if you lose it or reduce it
depending on where NCD is applied in the calculation process- dependent on insurance company it will affect the end price more or less
So it's just a case of shopping around?
correct?
thanks for the great amount of info
I get
if insurance companies can s...w you they will
your risk goes up, hence your premium will after a fault claim
NCD will reduce the premium by a certain %- less so if you lose it or reduce it
depending on where NCD is applied in the calculation process- dependent on insurance company it will affect the end price more or less
So it's just a case of shopping around?
correct?
cramorra said:
Peace guys....please
thanks for the great amount of info
I get
if insurance companies can s...w you they will
your risk goes up, hence your premium will after a fault claim
NCD will reduce the premium by a certain %- less so if you lose it or reduce it
depending on where NCD is applied in the calculation process- dependent on insurance company it will affect the end price more or less
So it's just a case of shopping around?
correct?
More accurately, given the difficulty in accurately assessing the true risk faced by a policyholder, different insurers will take different approaches to claims etc when assessing the premium charged. Given the numerous insurers out there and the ease with which prices can be compared, insurers need to ensure their premium rates are competitive or else they will lose the business.thanks for the great amount of info
I get
if insurance companies can s...w you they will
your risk goes up, hence your premium will after a fault claim
NCD will reduce the premium by a certain %- less so if you lose it or reduce it
depending on where NCD is applied in the calculation process- dependent on insurance company it will affect the end price more or less
So it's just a case of shopping around?
correct?
So your claim doesn't really make any economic sense expect to confirm that, like any business, insurers will seek to charge prices that maximises their profits in a competitive environment!
Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 28th February 08:43
cramorra said:
So it's just a case of shopping around?
correct?
That is the only thing you really need to do. Some insurers will want your business more than others. The only ways to compete are on price and quality of cover.correct?
Up until this year, I have always played the standard 'game' with my broker. The renewal comes in at over 2.5 times what I paid last year, I get on the phone to them and they beat any other quote I have got and I end up paying less than I did last year.
The net result is I paid £185 for exactly the same policy that they quoted £505 for. I wonder how many people just pay the £505 without thinking about it...
kingston12 said:
That is the only thing you really need to do. Some insurers will want your business more than others. The only ways to compete are on price and quality of cover.
Up until this year, I have always played the standard 'game' with my broker. The renewal comes in at over 2.5 times what I paid last year, I get on the phone to them and they beat any other quote I have got and I end up paying less than I did last year.
The net result is I paid £185 for exactly the same policy that they quoted £505 for. I wonder how many people just pay the £505 without thinking about it...
Most insurers don't make an underwriting profit, so the average premiums are (slightly) too low in aggregate. This means that those who don't shop around inevitably subsidise those who do.Up until this year, I have always played the standard 'game' with my broker. The renewal comes in at over 2.5 times what I paid last year, I get on the phone to them and they beat any other quote I have got and I end up paying less than I did last year.
The net result is I paid £185 for exactly the same policy that they quoted £505 for. I wonder how many people just pay the £505 without thinking about it...
cramorra said:
Peace guys....please
There is zero prospect of continuing a reasonable discussion once sidicks decides to derail it.He/she is highly defensive, is obsessed with point scoring, is pedantic to the extreme and attacks at the slightest 'provocation' and appears to be blindly obsessed with attacking anyone who makes negative comments about procedures/decisions made within finaciallly based industries/operations.
See his/her previous responses which prove this.
ReaderScars said:
There is zero prospect of continuing a reasonable discussion once sidicks decides to derail it.
He/she is highly defensive, is obsessed with point scoring, is pedantic to the extreme and attacks at the slightest 'provocation' and appears to be blindly obsessed with attacking anyone who makes negative comments about procedures/decisions made within finaciallly based industries/operations.
See his/her previous responses which prove this.
All that may be true, but on this topic, he's pretty much spot on. There have been some really moronic comments made re the insurers on this thread from people who haven't got the foggiest clue about what they are actually criticising. And they haven't come from SidlicksHe/she is highly defensive, is obsessed with point scoring, is pedantic to the extreme and attacks at the slightest 'provocation' and appears to be blindly obsessed with attacking anyone who makes negative comments about procedures/decisions made within finaciallly based industries/operations.
See his/her previous responses which prove this.
ReaderScars said:
There is zero prospect of 'continuing a reasonable discussion once sidicks decides to derail it.
"Continuing a reasonable discussion?" 
Which part of the initial discussion (before I got involved) was reasonable?
Brads67 said:
It`s a con
Insewerance companies are utter scum.
Insewerance companies are utter scum.
briang9 said:
it is a con...b
ds the lot of them!!
ds the lot of them!!popeyewhite said:
...that will lie and cheat to get your money
popeyewhite said:
... To me, that's a outright con.
popeyewhite said:
Incorrect if the thieving b'stards make up any difference at renewal on the premium.
And then:popeyewhite said:
No judgements on my part, just speaking for the naive motoring public who quite rightly think the motor insurance industry is run by lying, cheating, thieving con men bds. smile
So if you want to point the figure at someone for spoiling a 'reasonable discussion', you might like to point the finger elsewhere.HTH
sidicks said:
Most insurers don't make an underwriting profit, so the average premiums are (slightly) too low in aggregate. This means that those who don't shop around inevitably subsidise those who do.
As a point of order I would say the vast majority make an underwriting profit but not a combined operating profit most years. Interesting developments the last couple of days with the way Injury claims payouts are calculated.
Aviva announce a 385 million one of charge to profit this year, plus 2% off their Solvency margin.
This will hurt some operators pretty badly.
desolate said:
As a point of order I would say the vast majority make an underwriting profit but not a combined operating profit most years.
Why do you say that?http://blog.abi.org.uk/2016/08/underwriting-profit...
ABI article said:
Latest figures from the ABI reveal that last year, the UK motor insurance market received more in premiums than it incurred in claims and expenses for the first time in 22 years.
sidicks said:
desolate said:
As a point of order I would say the vast majority make an underwriting profit but not a combined operating profit most years.
Why do you say that?http://blog.abi.org.uk/2016/08/underwriting-profit...
ABI article said:
Latest figures from the ABI reveal that last year, the UK motor insurance market received more in premiums than it incurred in claims and expenses for the first time in 22 years.
Claims and expsenses means combined operating ratio
Underwriting is premium to claims.
sidicks said:
So you think the ABI article is wrong? They claim no underwriting profit for 22 years, prior to 2015...
Yes. That is my bold and assertive claim.In general the insurers will report a "Combined Operating Ratio" which is underwriting profits minus operating costs. If this is below 100% the CEO will be feted with fair maiden and untold riches.
Their reported profits will differ significantly due to reserve movements and profits from other activities.
I think the article above spells it out, and is intended as something for non-industry consumption.
But this is splitting hairs.
Cashflow in motor insurance is generally superb so it more than makes up for wafer thin margin for many large entities.
(You would generally need to return an underwriting result of between 40 and 60 percent of the net premium to be considered "profitable")
desolate said:
Yes. That is my bold and assertive claim.
In general the insurers will report a "Combined Operating Ratio" which is underwriting profits minus operating costs.
Are you sure?In general the insurers will report a "Combined Operating Ratio" which is underwriting profits minus operating costs.
Underwriting profit is a term used in the insurance industry. It consists of the earned premium remaining after losses have been paid and administrative expenses have been deducted. It does not include any investment income earned on held premiums. Many companies will eschew underwriting profit in order to gain a greater market share.
underwriting profit: The profit that an insurer derives from providing insurance or reinsurance coverage, exclusive of the income it derives from investments.
http://www.theactuary.com/news/2016/05/motor-insur...
These insurers only make a profit due to investment income (which is not included in the underwriting profit calculation (ignoring reserve releases)).
Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 28th February 20:33
sidicks said:
Are you sure?
Underwriting profit is a term used in the insurance industry. It consists of the earned premium remaining after losses have been paid and administrative expenses have been deducted. It does not include any investment income earned on held premiums. Many companies will eschew underwriting profit in order to gain a greater market share.
underwriting profit: The profit that an insurer derives from providing insurance or reinsurance coverage, exclusive of the income it derives from investments.
These insurers only make a profit due to investment income (which is not included in the underwriting profit calculation (ignoring reserve releases).
Maybe I am using terms that are only used within the industry but every deal I have ever done has underwriting result above the COR lineUnderwriting profit is a term used in the insurance industry. It consists of the earned premium remaining after losses have been paid and administrative expenses have been deducted. It does not include any investment income earned on held premiums. Many companies will eschew underwriting profit in order to gain a greater market share.
underwriting profit: The profit that an insurer derives from providing insurance or reinsurance coverage, exclusive of the income it derives from investments.
These insurers only make a profit due to investment income (which is not included in the underwriting profit calculation (ignoring reserve releases).
It generally goes
Premium
Minus
Tax
Minus
Acquisition costs
Minus
Claims
Equals
Underwriting result
Minus
Funky underwriting stuff
Minus
Overheads
Equals
COR
How boring is that?
Edited to add: this isn't really helpful for the thread and to move on it is clear we are arguing semantics and that I may be guilty of using internal jargon between my companies and the insurance companies I deal with.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 28th February 20:51
desolate said:
Maybe I am using terms that are only used within the industry but every deal I have ever done has underwriting result above the COR line
It generally goes
Premium
Minus
Tax
Minus
Acquisition costs
Minus
Claims
Equals
Underwriting result
Minus
Funky underwriting stuff
Minus
Overheads
Equals
COR
How boring is that?
Edited to add: this isn't really helpful for the thread and to move on it is clear we are arguing semantics and that I may be guilty of using internal jargon between my companies and the insurance companies I deal with.
I thought I remembered that you were 'in this business', hence I was surprised that we didn't agree on the definition. I also deal with insurance companies, albeit in a different capacity to you.It generally goes
Premium
Minus
Tax
Minus
Acquisition costs
Minus
Claims
Equals
Underwriting result
Minus
Funky underwriting stuff
Minus
Overheads
Equals
COR
How boring is that?
Edited to add: this isn't really helpful for the thread and to move on it is clear we are arguing semantics and that I may be guilty of using internal jargon between my companies and the insurance companies I deal with.
Regardless, the thread is dead - NCD has been explained by Twig (and others). The only other posts are from those who don't want to understand it because they want something to moan about!
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff