Insurance for a 17 year old, just passed his test. £4,000+
Discussion
s3fella said:
My insurance in 1987 for a 1.1 fiesta pop plus was £693, 3rd party fire and theft.
Car was a 1985 and cost me 2100quid.
I worked all holidays at school, (genuinely not one day off on hols) to pay for it all.
Don't know what it translates to now, overall, but motoring as a 17 yr old has never been cheap, that's for sure. I recall not being able to afford petrol to get home from where we'd been on several occasions !
from http://safalra.com/other/historical-uk-inflation-p... it works out at about £1,700....Car was a 1985 and cost me 2100quid.
I worked all holidays at school, (genuinely not one day off on hols) to pay for it all.
Don't know what it translates to now, overall, but motoring as a 17 yr old has never been cheap, that's for sure. I recall not being able to afford petrol to get home from where we'd been on several occasions !
Your insurance would have been £1,700 in 1987 to equal £4,000 now.
By the time he got in last night, it was too late to ring the companies suggested earlier, he`ll be ringing them this evening.
currybum said:
Even though it was her fault, looking back I now know that my inexperience prevented me from avoiding the accident. Given the exact same situation 13 years on I would have spotted her car approaching the roundabout too quickly, assume that she was going to do something stupid and taken pre-emptive measures to avoid getting hit.
I'd like to think that my years on a pedal cycle before I drove would have made me sensitive to cars approaching fast!jamesedwards said:
Just now checked an Admiral multicar quote. 4000 miles a year on W reg 12v Corsa 1.0 as an 18 year old with NO NCB having held a full UK licence for 8 months. Did it with 2 other individuals as occasional drivers (both with high NCB, one male one female) and myself as the major diver on my own policy. All in came out at £1541.
The biggest saver was waiting the 8 months rather than getting it straight away. saved over £850 waiting 8 months! well worth it.
If thats worth 4000miles a year i'll eat my own sThe biggest saver was waiting the 8 months rather than getting it straight away. saved over £850 waiting 8 months! well worth it.
t. I probably do that in 5 months.sebhaque said:
I got shafted when I first started driving at 18 (only 4 years ago), was paying something criminal like £2500 third party only (not even fire and theft!).
After playing with the figures I found that my renewal (on an Impreza) dropped from £2800 to £1600 if I put my excess up from £250 to £1000. Seeing as if the worst was to happen and I did crash, I'd end up paying the same anyway, it made sense to opt for the higher excess and spend less on the initial outlay. In a sense it also made me drive a bit more sensibly as I knew that if I stuffed it, I'd have to pay a lovely four figure sum before anything else happened.
My policy also has my mum and dad on it as named drivers. My mum won't go near my car and my dad won't drive it incase he kerbs a wheel (like he did my M3!
) but it helps bring the policy prices down and it's good to know they're fully covered on the insurance should they need to move my car or take it in an emergency etc.
I pay a very reasonably premium (£1200 fully comp) on my 911 now and I'm convinced that's down to my excess.
Not hating, but your 22 years old.. you've had a Impreza, M3 and now a 911? .. Intresting to say the least.After playing with the figures I found that my renewal (on an Impreza) dropped from £2800 to £1600 if I put my excess up from £250 to £1000. Seeing as if the worst was to happen and I did crash, I'd end up paying the same anyway, it made sense to opt for the higher excess and spend less on the initial outlay. In a sense it also made me drive a bit more sensibly as I knew that if I stuffed it, I'd have to pay a lovely four figure sum before anything else happened.
My policy also has my mum and dad on it as named drivers. My mum won't go near my car and my dad won't drive it incase he kerbs a wheel (like he did my M3!
) but it helps bring the policy prices down and it's good to know they're fully covered on the insurance should they need to move my car or take it in an emergency etc.I pay a very reasonably premium (£1200 fully comp) on my 911 now and I'm convinced that's down to my excess.
GG89 said:
£4k fking hell that is ridiculous. I'm 23 and still paying circa 1k to insure a MINI cooper, there is no cheap way around it just need to bite the bullet or forget it and do without. What kind of prices are the rip off insurance companies going to be charging new drivers in 10 years time? I honestly dread to think.
You must live in a rough area or have 0 NCB. I'm paying £800 on a Z4M at 24...king hell that is ridiculous. I'm 23 and still paying circa 1k to insure a MINI cooper, there is no cheap way around it just need to bite the bullet or forget it and do without. What kind of prices are the rip off insurance companies going to be charging new drivers in 10 years time? I honestly dread to think.otolith said:
Because the kind of people who have no-fault accidents also tend to have more fault accidents or no-fault accidents in which the costs can't be reclaimed than the kind who do not.
I had two claims when I was in my twenties, both of which went 50-50 for lack of evidence, both of which I felt deeply aggrieved about at the time because I was damned sure neither was my fault. Looking back, they weren't my fault, but if I had been a better driver, I wouldn't have put myself in the way of other people's mistakes and ended up costing my insurer money.
I had two claims when I was in my twenties, both of which went 50-50 for lack of evidence, both of which I felt deeply aggrieved about at the time because I was damned sure neither was my fault. Looking back, they weren't my fault, but if I had been a better driver, I wouldn't have put myself in the way of other people's mistakes and ended up costing my insurer money.
I was not even in the car. So lets say that is correct if you are not at fault so you are more lightly to have an accident after. It could make a difference in premiums for 3 years or 5 years. If you don't have any accidents that the higher premiums should be paid back.
And how can you be responsible or be more lightly for other people hitting your car. That's just rubbish. And worded a way of getting more money out of you.
hollydog said:
otolith said:
Because the kind of people who have no-fault accidents also tend to have more fault accidents or no-fault accidents in which the costs can't be reclaimed than the kind who do not.
I had two claims when I was in my twenties, both of which went 50-50 for lack of evidence, both of which I felt deeply aggrieved about at the time because I was damned sure neither was my fault. Looking back, they weren't my fault, but if I had been a better driver, I wouldn't have put myself in the way of other people's mistakes and ended up costing my insurer money.
I had two claims when I was in my twenties, both of which went 50-50 for lack of evidence, both of which I felt deeply aggrieved about at the time because I was damned sure neither was my fault. Looking back, they weren't my fault, but if I had been a better driver, I wouldn't have put myself in the way of other people's mistakes and ended up costing my insurer money.
I was not even in the car. So lets say that is correct if you are not at fault so you are more lightly to have an accident after. It could make a difference in premiums for 3 years or 5 years. If you don't have any accidents that the higher premiums should be paid back.
And how can you be responsible or be more lightly for other people hitting your car. That's just rubbish. And worded a way of getting more money out of you.
And I'm saying that as someone who's had 2 non-fault claims putting up my insurance.
hollydog said:
And how can you be responsible or be more lightly for other people hitting your car. That's just rubbish. And worded a way of getting more money out of you.
This point comes up endlessly on pistonheads. Its not difficult to understand. Here's an example.Driver A - someone who works from midday to 8pm and shops in an out of town supermarket with ample large parking spaces.
Driver B - someone who battles through rush hour traffic for 3 hours a day, shops in a city supermarket with tiny difficult parking spaces.
Both are equally skilled drivers, cover the same miles every year and have never crashed into anyone in their lives and never will. Who is more likely to have their car crashed into by others? Are they more or less likely to be crashed into again?
Its a fairly simple, quantifiable risk, hence it costs more. Its not unfair, its not the insurance company pulling a fast one, its the simple facts of life that statistically if you get crashed into, the place where you drove/parked your car was a contributory cause - you are therefore a higher risk and the premium is adjusted accordingly. Probably the least unfair element of insurance pricing.
hollydog said:
If you don't have any accidents that the higher premiums should be paid back.
Try that one out with the bookies when you lose a bet with them.They don't need to make up spurious excuses for increasing their quote, it isn't in their interests to do so. If a factor increases your premium, it's because they believe - based on the evidence they have - that it increases their risk in covering you.
hollydog said:
And how can you be responsible or be more lightly for other people hitting your car.
If your car was hit while you weren't in it, it may reflect any of where you live or where and how you park your car or even how much common sense you have - any of which could make it more likely that it will happen again, and that perhaps next time there won't be a note. If it was hit while you were driving, perhaps a more defensive driver would have avoided the accident. Perhaps a less defensive driver is more likely to have another accident, and next time it might be fault or 50-50. Note that the insurers don't sit down trying to puzzle out the speculation above - it is totally irrelevant. They don't need to know why a factor increases the risk, only that it does and by how much.
Edited by otolith on Tuesday 31st July 10:26
otolith said:
hollydog said:
If you don't have any accidents that the higher premiums should be paid back.
Try that one out with the bookies when you lose a bet with them.They don't need to make up spurious excuses for increasing their quote, it isn't in their interests to do so. If a factor increases your premium, it's because they believe - based on the evidence they have - that it increases their risk in covering you.
GreigM said:
otolith said:
hollydog said:
If you don't have any accidents that the higher premiums should be paid back.
Try that one out with the bookies when you lose a bet with them.They don't need to make up spurious excuses for increasing their quote, it isn't in their interests to do so. If a factor increases your premium, it's because they believe - based on the evidence they have - that it increases their risk in covering you.
sebhaque said:
I got shafted when I first started driving at 18 (only 4 years ago), was paying something criminal like £2500 third party only (not even fire and theft!).
After playing with the figures I found that my renewal (on an Impreza) dropped from £2800 to £1600 if I put my excess up from £250 to £1000. Seeing as if the worst was to happen and I did crash, I'd end up paying the same anyway, it made sense to opt for the higher excess and spend less on the initial outlay. In a sense it also made me drive a bit more sensibly as I knew that if I stuffed it, I'd have to pay a lovely four figure sum before anything else happened.
My policy also has my mum and dad on it as named drivers. My mum won't go near my car and my dad won't drive it incase he kerbs a wheel (like he did my M3! ) but it helps bring the policy prices down and it's good to know they're fully covered on the insurance should they need to move my car or take it in an emergency etc.
I pay a very reasonably premium (£1200 fully comp) on my 911 now and I'm convinced that's down to my excess.
Pretty much my exact story, I did exactly the same with my excess when I bought the 123d. Put it up from £250 to £1000 and the quote dropped by £700 to £1700 After playing with the figures I found that my renewal (on an Impreza) dropped from £2800 to £1600 if I put my excess up from £250 to £1000. Seeing as if the worst was to happen and I did crash, I'd end up paying the same anyway, it made sense to opt for the higher excess and spend less on the initial outlay. In a sense it also made me drive a bit more sensibly as I knew that if I stuffed it, I'd have to pay a lovely four figure sum before anything else happened.
My policy also has my mum and dad on it as named drivers. My mum won't go near my car and my dad won't drive it incase he kerbs a wheel (like he did my M3!
) but it helps bring the policy prices down and it's good to know they're fully covered on the insurance should they need to move my car or take it in an emergency etc.I pay a very reasonably premium (£1200 fully comp) on my 911 now and I'm convinced that's down to my excess.
I have both grandparents added to my policy, they cut it in half at the time (£3400 without them added)
And as you say, the high excess is a brilliant deterrant. I have literally seen the figure flash before my eyes before deciding against trying to drift my car around a wet corner
Well, since my last post I see the evidence for upping the insurance on young drivers has been confirmed.
What we need to do is sort the liabilities from the reliable ones, easy to say very difficult to do.
Inexperience and attitude is dangerous in the wrong hands, so they pay more.
Now before everyone has a go at me, I offer the chance of finding more reasonable premiums.
Most insurance companies( I believe ) work out the rates by percentages of vehicle make/models in existance and the percentage of them that have been the subject of a claim, along with the areas the claims were made in.
.
Suprisingly, my 17 year old lad has found a Ford Focus 1.4 from 2000 is a better option than most.
Ford Focus built in the millions, but not such a huge number (as a percentage) involved in claims, he can get, as a provisional driver, cover for £960 from Collingwood, that rises to £1200 when he passes.
His calculations not mine.
I now await the rush of 17 year olds buying Focus>>>...I am not affiliated to Ford Motor Company in any way!
What we need to do is sort the liabilities from the reliable ones, easy to say very difficult to do.
Inexperience and attitude is dangerous in the wrong hands, so they pay more.
Now before everyone has a go at me, I offer the chance of finding more reasonable premiums.
Most insurance companies( I believe ) work out the rates by percentages of vehicle make/models in existance and the percentage of them that have been the subject of a claim, along with the areas the claims were made in.
.
Suprisingly, my 17 year old lad has found a Ford Focus 1.4 from 2000 is a better option than most.
Ford Focus built in the millions, but not such a huge number (as a percentage) involved in claims, he can get, as a provisional driver, cover for £960 from Collingwood, that rises to £1200 when he passes.
His calculations not mine.
I now await the rush of 17 year olds buying Focus>>>...I am not affiliated to Ford Motor Company in any way!
S2Mike said:
Well, since my last post I see the evidence for upping the insurance on young drivers has been confirmed.
What we need to do is sort the liabilities from the reliable ones, easy to say very difficult to do.
Inexperience and attitude is dangerous in the wrong hands, so they pay more.
Now before everyone has a go at me, I offer the chance of finding more reasonable premiums.
Most insurance companies( I believe ) work out the rates by percentages of vehicle make/models in existance and the percentage of them that have been the subject of a claim, along with the areas the claims were made in.
.
Suprisingly, my 17 year old lad has found a Ford Focus 1.4 from 2000 is a better option than most.
Ford Focus built in the millions, but not such a huge number (as a percentage) involved in claims, he can get, as a provisional driver, cover for £960 from Collingwood, that rises to £1200 when he passes.
His calculations not mine.
I now await the rush of 17 year olds buying Focus>>>...I am not affiliated to Ford Motor Company in any way!
Oooopsss....What we need to do is sort the liabilities from the reliable ones, easy to say very difficult to do.
Inexperience and attitude is dangerous in the wrong hands, so they pay more.
Now before everyone has a go at me, I offer the chance of finding more reasonable premiums.
Most insurance companies( I believe ) work out the rates by percentages of vehicle make/models in existance and the percentage of them that have been the subject of a claim, along with the areas the claims were made in.
.
Suprisingly, my 17 year old lad has found a Ford Focus 1.4 from 2000 is a better option than most.
Ford Focus built in the millions, but not such a huge number (as a percentage) involved in claims, he can get, as a provisional driver, cover for £960 from Collingwood, that rises to £1200 when he passes.
His calculations not mine.
I now await the rush of 17 year olds buying Focus>>>...I am not affiliated to Ford Motor Company in any way!
Collingwood explicitly do not insure policyholders who hold Full UK licenses.
Upon qualification, the insurance ceases.
I think that might be a little porkie on his behalf and a big bill with another insurer when he passes.
S2Mike said:
OOOH, is that right, sorry if I have miss lead anyone I will go and have words.
FYI matehttp://www.collingwoodlearners.co.uk
Wh00sher said:
s3fella said:
My insurance in 1987 for a 1.1 fiesta pop plus was £693, 3rd party fire and theft.
Car was a 1985 and cost me 2100quid.
I worked all holidays at school, (genuinely not one day off on hols) to pay for it all.
Don't know what it translates to now, overall, but motoring as a 17 yr old has never been cheap, that's for sure. I recall not being able to afford petrol to get home from where we'd been on several occasions !
from http://safalra.com/other/historical-uk-inflation-p... it works out at about £1,700....Car was a 1985 and cost me 2100quid.
I worked all holidays at school, (genuinely not one day off on hols) to pay for it all.
Don't know what it translates to now, overall, but motoring as a 17 yr old has never been cheap, that's for sure. I recall not being able to afford petrol to get home from where we'd been on several occasions !
Your insurance would have been £1,700 in 1987 to equal £4,000 now.
By the time he got in last night, it was too late to ring the companies suggested earlier, he`ll be ringing them this evening.
Blame the ins companies, the accident management companies, the eu for legislation that makes a 15mph accident on a polo about 2500 to fix, the whiplashers, the unsure drivers, the 20mil claims etc.
It's a different world now. Motoring is more expensive than it has ever been IMO.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff