Yes, another one

[anonymous-user]

Can anyone tell me why insurance is so vehicle specific, instead of individual basis?

Back in the RSA, I would have a personal policy with my insurer, which would be broken into sections. Hosehold, contents, Specified and Vehicles. So I could insure my house (fire, subsidence, etc), my clothes and stuff in my house, specified items like my SLR camera and notebook, and lastly all my vehicles.

If I were to take a policy on a single vehicle only, with nothing else, the cost is high. Group it with everything else, and it becomes cheaper.

I'm guessing the insurance rates are silly (e.g. £1500 per year for a £1000 golf) is due to 3rd party, but then why if you have 2 Golfs, can it not be lower, as you cant drive them at the same time?

Is there no way I can group my contents, motorbike and car together onto one policy?

[Papa Hotel]

You don't have to be driving a car for someone to crash into it.

[anonymous-user]

Papa Hotel said:

You don't have to be driving a car for someone to crash into it.

And he would then claim from you how?

[Animal]

Killboy said:

Papa Hotel said:

You don't have to be driving a car for someone to crash into it.

And he would then claim from you how?

The other driver presumably wouldn't, but would you not want to claim under your motor policy for repairs to your car?

[Papa Hotel]

Killboy said:

And he would then claim from you how?

Why are you talking like Chandler Bing? I fking hate that.

Anyway, he wouldn't claim against you. You'd be out riding your bike while the car parked up gets a hit and run. You come home to find your car smashed up and you make a claim on your insurance to get it repaired. Or, you're in the car and while you're away your bike gets stolen, you claim for that.

[anonymous-user]

Animal said:

Killboy said:

Papa Hotel said:

You don't have to be driving a car for someone to crash into it.

And he would then claim from you how?

The other driver presumably wouldn't, but would you not want to claim under your motor policy for repairs to your car?

Perhaps, but I doubt its going to be a £20k claim (obviously depending on the car). The 3rd party I'm talking about is personal injury and the like, which falls away with multiple vehicles.

Its more about the fact that there having two is as risky as one. Chances are the parked car isn't going to smash into a 458 and give the driver and his missus the dreaded whiplash.

[anonymous-user]

Papa Hotel said:

Killboy said:

And he would then claim from you how?

Why are you talking like Chandler Bing? I fking hate that.

Anyway, he wouldn't claim against you. You'd be out riding your bike while the car parked up gets a hit and run. You come home to find your car smashed up and you make a claim on your insurance to get it repaired. Or, you're in the car and while you're away your bike gets stolen, you claim for that.

Yes, I'm not saying you get 2 for one insurance. I'm saying that a portion of the risk is diminished when spread across multiple vehicles.

So I have a car, premium is £1000.
I have a bike, premium is £1000.
Together, on the same policy, same risk class, I would maybe pay £1700, as a percentage reserved for 3rd party risk falls away on one. They still have the chance of being crashed into and stolen, so I am still paying more, but not for the portion of risk both of them have being driven.

[Papa Hotel]

Killboy said:

Yes, I'm not saying you get 2 for one insurance. I'm saying that a portion of the risk is diminished when spread across multiple vehicles.

So I have a car, premium is £1000.
I have a bike, premium is £1000.
Together, on the same policy, same risk class, I would maybe pay £1700, as a percentage reserved for 3rd party risk falls away on one. They still have the chance of being crashed into and stolen, so I am still paying more, but not for the portion of risk both of them have being driven.

And what I'm saying to you is that is isn't diminished. An unused vehicle is still at risk of having a claim made on it. Why don't you limit your mileage, that can reduce premiums.

[anonymous-user]

Papa Hotel said:

Killboy said:

Yes, I'm not saying you get 2 for one insurance. I'm saying that a portion of the risk is diminished when spread across multiple vehicles.

So I have a car, premium is £1000.
I have a bike, premium is £1000.
Together, on the same policy, same risk class, I would maybe pay £1700, as a percentage reserved for 3rd party risk falls away on one. They still have the chance of being crashed into and stolen, so I am still paying more, but not for the portion of risk both of them have being driven.

And what I'm saying to you is that is isn't diminished. An unused vehicle is still at risk of having a claim made on it. Why don't you limit your mileage, that can reduce premiums.

What is the possible size of an unused vehicles claim?

[Papa Hotel]

Killboy said:

What is the possible size of an unused vehicles claim?

How would I know? What's the vehicle? Assume it gets crushed under a lorry.

[anonymous-user]

Papa Hotel said:

Killboy said:

What is the possible size of an unused vehicles claim?

How would I know? What's the vehicle? Assume it gets crushed under a lorry.

Lets say my R32. Market value £12k.

If a Lorry drove over it, how much could I claim for?

[steviegunn]

Killboy said:

What is the possible size of an unused vehicles claim?

I would guess the maximum is the cost of replacing it if it's stolen.

[anonymous-user]

steviegunn said:

Killboy said:

What is the possible size of an unused vehicles claim?

I would guess the maximum is the cost of replacing it if it's stolen.

Now if I was out driving it, what is the maximum value a claim might be?

[Devil2575]

Killboy said:

Can anyone tell me why insurance is so vehicle specific, instead of individual basis?

Because the kind of car you choose can be an indicator as to the risk you pose.

Insurance is a combination of your personal information, where you live and the car you drive. All of these have an effect on the risk you pose to any insurer.

[thescamper]

The biggest single risk is 3rd party injury claims, so if you have two cars the overall risk to your insurer is reduced by a half.

[anonymous-user]

thescamper said:

The biggest single risk is 3rd party injury claims, so if you have two cars the overall risk to your insurer is reduced by a half.

Kaching.

Everything else everyone says is correct, to a point. Yes adding cars to a policy will add cost, but the one thing that does not change is the chance to inflict personal injury along with the cost of the car you could possibly hit. Cost of the cars will still be determined by their risk profiles (accident, theft, etc), but 3rd party risk gets removed from additional vehicles.

[Raize]

It would particularly make sense for young drivers to be able to insure multiple cars for the price of the highest premium'd car. After all in that case 95% of the premium is the driver anyway. And if it's TPO there's no extra risk to the insurer as you can't have a "fault" claim against you if the car was parked.

[Papa Hotel]

Ah, I see what you're getting at now, I cannot say you're wrong. Hmm...

[Grodecki]

Killboy said:

Lets say my R32. Market value £12k.

If a Lorry drove over it, how much could I claim for?

As much as it takes to get an exact replacement of your car, if you so desire. On a third party claim that is what you are entitled to.

Plus a hire car for the duration of your dispute, if you go with a claims managment company.