Insurance rant

[TwigtheWonderkid]

xRIEx said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

But if you had no excess,

who sells nil excess policies?

I'm sure someone will. But that's not the point. Fact is thye would only be wear and tear if lumped together after a long period. You could claim for them individually, therefore they could give rise to a claim and therefore, by your scenario, should, by the strict wording of the question, be declared. But no one does and no one cares.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Devil2575 said:

Leptons said:

Car insurance is one of the most bent things going in this country. That is why when I hear about someone 'Fronting' or getting one over on an insurance company in general, it bothers me not one jot.

Please explain how it's bent.

He can't because it isn't. It's just the usual mindless tripe trotted out by the hard of thinking.
The irony is, fronting and getting one over on insurers are costing us all more money, and it's the cost that probably bothers him!

[StottyEvo]

dacouch said:

StottyEvo said:

Do you have an opinion on this? Although it may have changed now as I tested it two years ago.

I ran a quote, the price came back at lets say £1000. I put a non fault accident on, not resulting in a claim. The price rose to £2200. I then removed the accident and it went back down to £1000. I then added an at fault accident resulting in £100,000 damage and the quote went to £2200.

Admiral didn't differentiate between a fault and non fault accident, their algorithms must have simply taken into account that there was some sort of accident.

You have to understand how Admiral work, they came to Insurance very late so have an advantage over the traditional Insurers in that they used the power of IT to ensure they had the best data and were able to target their premiums very accurately. The best way to describe Admiral is they're the Ryan Air of Car Insurance, both sell their products on price alone and use their computers to ensure they have an advantage over the rest of the market.

Admiral are one of the few Insurers who make a reasonable profit on the premiums they charge less claims paid.

I'm not an expert on Admiral's pricing but your example is either due to Admiral's own data indicating you're as likely to make a claim with a non fault accident as with a fault accident so they charge a premium to reflect it.

Unlikely as the amount was exactly the same to the pence. They literally took a crash as a crash irrespective of the circumstances

dacouch said:

Or that their computers are programmed to recognise customers who are massaging the quote to see if declaring the correct information (Or incorrect information) has a major effect on the premium. If this is the case they may program their quote system to quote the same price for the claim so they collect the correct premium for your accident.

I took this into account and this is why I put the non fault accident first. Then when the fault accident was added it should have exceeded the non fault price, but it didn't.

dacouch said:

Alternatively many Insurers alter their premiums daily or even a number of times a day (As would Ryan Air) in response to the type and / or amount of business they're receiving. Insurers are similar to bookmakers in that to ensure they make money and do not carry to much risk one outcome they need to balance their book of business so they do not have to much money riding on one outcome (Horse). If they're premiums mean at that time they're receiving a lot of customers with non fault claims or fault claims they may want to adjust their prices to attract or dissuade a certain type of business.

On the same vein, if they're taking a lot more business than normal on that day they can afford to be picky on the type of business they're accepting by altering their prices so they're more competitive on customers with no accidents whatsoever. It's an obvious response for any business to alter their prices to attract the type of customers they make more money on and the result of having sophisticated IT systems that enable them to do this.

This is one of the points that I am making, it isn't all statistics and risk as many keep claiming that prices are purely based on this. If it were, I'm pretty certain that in my example the premiums should have been different.

dacouch said:

It could be the combination of your personal details, location and type of vehicle which Admiral find make you far more likely to make a claim than someone without a claim

Their may well be other reasons that Admiral have quoted you these prices, I'm not an expert on this, Insurers pay huge sums to employ highly qualified staff with sophisticated IT and comprehensive data to enable them to try and price their premiums at a level that remains competitive but also at a level that they can make money.

I think its important to remember that these highly qualified staff and sophisticated IT and comprehensive data worked together to decide that a non fault accident with no claim makes me as high a risk as a fault accident with £100,000 damage caused. I'm sure you can see why I may be skeptical

[Shotgun Rider]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I'm sure someone will. But that's not the point. Fact is thye would only be wear and tear if lumped together after a long period. You could claim for them individually, therefore they could give rise to a claim and therefore, by your scenario, should, by the strict wording of the question, be declared. But no one does and no one cares.

I'd love to hear your insurance companies response for a claim of damage after youd chucked building material into your pick up. Hardly accidental. Stupid discussion. I'm out.

[dacouch]

StottyEvo said:

I think its important to remember that these highly qualified staff and sophisticated IT and comprehensive data worked together to decide that a non fault accident with no claim makes me as high a risk as a fault accident with £100,000 damage caused. I'm sure you can see why I may be skeptical

1) As I mentioned, Admiral may regard an accident whether fault or non fault as being the same risk

2) See 1)

3) It is all statistics and risk, it's a really big business dealing in hundreds of millions of pounds, the staff and computers do not just take a guess. It's all calculated on how they can ultimately make money

4) If that's the premium Admirals IT systems want to charge you on that day for the details you inputted then that's the premium they want to charge.

I've given an explanation of very roughly how it works.

You need to bear in mind that Admiral are one of the most profitable Insurers in the market, they've consistently made good profits over periods other Insurers have been losing money. They do this by combining using their data to come up with prices they can make money on each customer whilst also remaining competitive or the parts of the market they want to target which they see as being profitable for their business model.

If an Insurer does not want the business, they have a simple way of not accepting the business, they simply quote a high premium

[bazza white]

My brother went through the same a drunk driver who could barely walk drove into my brothers parked car and did a load of damage and faced an increased premium to his delight.


Someone went into my car and I decided against claiming as I may as well just get a second hand bumper to save my insurance increase.

[swisstoni]

bazza white said:

Someone went into my car and I decided against claiming as I may as well just get a second hand bumper to save my insurance increase.

Me too. I'll do almost anything to avoid going near my insurers. Once you add up the increased premium (especially if you have a few cars, plus having to give chapter and verse for the next 5 years and not forgetting the excess you will be forking out anyway) it would take quite some damage before I'd claim.

[CoolHands]

bazza white said:

My brother went through the same a drunk driver who could barely walk drove into my brothers parked car and did a load of damage and faced an increased premium to his delight.


Someone went into my car and I decided against claiming as I may as well just get a second hand bumper to save my insurance increase.

so from the insurers point of view it has been worthwhile penalising someone who claims (regardless of fault), as it has reduced their future claims (ie yours).

[xRIEx]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

xRIEx said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

But if you had no excess,

who sells nil excess policies?

I'm sure someone will. But that's not the point. Fact is thye would only be wear and tear if lumped together after a long period. You could claim for them individually, therefore they could give rise to a claim and therefore, by your scenario, should, by the strict wording of the question, be declared. But no one does and no one cares.

No company does a nil material damage excess on private car (same for household) because they don't want the gripe of dealing with £80 claims - that's the whole point of an excess. The only time I saw a £50 excess was about 10 years ago on a policy that had been renewed for the previous 10 years.

And it is exactly the point, precisely because they couldn't be claimed for individually. A claim would come from a sudden and unforseen event; throwing stuff in the back of a pick up may be sudden, but it is not unforseen in the expected use of a pick up - it is normal, expected use and ergo, wear and tear.

I can't believe that even needs explaining.

[xRIEx]

dacouch said:

Their may well be other reasons that Admiral have quoted you these prices, I'm not an expert on this, Insurers pay huge sums to employ highly qualified staff with sophisticated IT and comprehensive data to enable them to try and price their premiums at a level that remains competitive but also at a level that they can make money.

You've clearly never seen or used Open GI! And I seriously doubt the average call centre operator is on a "huge sum" nor "highly qualified".