Speed awareness - notifying insurance
Discussion
whoami said:
liner33 said:
over_the_hill said:
And when they all realise they have a captive market and hike the price - then what. Despite what some on here might have you believe insurance is an effective cartel. If the price goes up too much you can't "do without it" unless you ditch the car completely. It will not be long before they cotton on to the fact that they can make money from this as well as "points" and since the others are doing it they have nothing to lose.
You worry about it IF and WHEN is happens , none of my insurers levy a fee for a SAC if they did I'd move my business to someone that didn't.Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Tuesday 12th March 20:05
Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Tuesday 12th March 20:05
liner33 said:
whoami said:
Even if it was more expensive?
Absolutely , I don't buy my insurance based on price, like many things in life cheapest is rarely the best liner33 said:
You can't really know the quality of he product until you make a claim.
You can however get an idea of how a company does business by choosing based on whether they load for SAC or levy a large admin fee for minor detail changes or for adding loan cars etc .
What evidence do you have that an insurance company that charges for things you don't think should be charged for (but someone else might) will provide a worse claims service than a company that charges for things you think should be charged for (but someone else might not).You can however get an idea of how a company does business by choosing based on whether they load for SAC or levy a large admin fee for minor detail changes or for adding loan cars etc .
In my experience, people think insurers should charge more for all the factors that don't apply to them. Young drivers think older drivers should pay more and they pay less, city dwellers think they're being unfaily treated, people with convictions think it's unfair they are charged more, people without convictions think they should get a discount. Etc etc.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
What evidence do you have that an insurance company that charges for things you don't think should be charged for (but someone else might) will provide a worse claims service than a company that charges for things you think should be charged for (but someone else might not).
I didnt suggest they did!!In 25 years of driving I've not made a claim, but if I was to be charged £35 to add a loan car to my policy for a day whilst my car was off the road I wouldn't be happy about it.
Consumers need to realise they can vote with their feet and if they are willing to not always go for the cheapest they may end up with a better service, whilst most drivers simply look at the bottom line its all too easy to end up being insured with the Ryanair of companies where significant additional charges are incurred if anything changes or the company feels they can get away with it.
I just called to accept a quote rather than the rip off renewal and was taken back when he asked if i`d been on a speed awareness course within the last five years.
Annoyingly I have, it raised my premium by £70.
What a pointless exercise that SAC was. I`m sure 3 points don't even raise my premium.
I`ll take the points if there`s a next time.
Annoyingly I have, it raised my premium by £70.
What a pointless exercise that SAC was. I`m sure 3 points don't even raise my premium.
I`ll take the points if there`s a next time.
sugerbear said:
A SAC course seems like a no brainer. In Essex the cost of the course is £97.50 vs 3 points + £100.
Why would anyone want three additional points on their licence when they can avoid them (and save a massive £2.50 in the process).
Because some people still believe It's revenue raising and like to cut their noses off to spite their faces. Why would anyone want three additional points on their licence when they can avoid them (and save a massive £2.50 in the process).
jagracer said:
sugerbear said:
A SAC course seems like a no brainer. In Essex the cost of the course is £97.50 vs 3 points + £100.
Why would anyone want three additional points on their licence when they can avoid them (and save a massive £2.50 in the process).
Because some people still believe It's revenue raising and like to cut their noses off to spite their faces. Why would anyone want three additional points on their licence when they can avoid them (and save a massive £2.50 in the process).
Some insurers charge for SAC, some charge for 3 points. If yours charges for both, or neither, then it's a choice between funding central government, and funding a non-official body whose work over the last couple of decades has contributed nothing to overall road safety and has led to lots of comfortable pensions. It's a choice, no?
jagracer said:
It's certainly an opinion, yes?
At the time, it was £100+ for thr SAC or 3 points and a £60 fine.I did the SAC believing a) it wouldn't affect my insurance b) no points are probably a better option.
That said the course was 4-hours and absolutely tortuous.
Though 0-points makes car hire and being insured on company vehicles etc easier if your young.
jagracer said:
It's certainly an opinion, yes?
At the time, it was £100+ for thr SAC or 3 points and a £60 fine.I did the SAC believing a) it wouldn't affect my insurance b) no points are probably a better option.
That said the course was 4-hours and absolutely tortuous.
Though 0-points makes car hire and being insured on company vehicles etc easier if your young.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff