Motor insurance history help

[FMOB]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

FMOB said:

Dingu said:

FMOB said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Camaro said:

Sometimes I really do wonder who polices this stuff as this just isn't fair, being honest.

Insurance isn't about fairness, but about statistics. Which is how it should be. There are people paying a hell of a lot more than you because of things they can't do anything about, like their age. It's not fair that a teenager pays more for car insurance than a 50 year old. The teenager had done nothing wrong. Or that the 50 y/o pays more for life insurance. Or that the bloke with cancer can't buy life insurance at all. None of it is fair. Welcome to life, it's not fair.

I would say the OP isn't being treated fairly and is being materially disadvantaged by the new insurer because the statistics aren't giving a full picture of what actually happened.

And you would be incorrect.

Care to explain but bear in mind you can use statistics to justify just about anything which is exactly what the insurance does.

That particular insurer's stats show that punters with a non fault claim go on to cost them more than punters with no claims. In the same way their stats show teenagers cost them a fortune, so get charged a fortune. There will be conscientious low risk teenagers who won't claim, so on them it's unfair, but it's not unfair to charge them on the basis that their risk is much higher.

So on the sample of one, their statistics show that risk.

Do the statistics from all of the other insurers show the same increase in risk?

[LF5335]

FMOB said:

So on the sample of one, their statistics show that risk.

Do the statistics from all of the other insurers show the same increase in risk?

How do you know it’s a sample of one?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

FMOB said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

FMOB said:

Dingu said:

FMOB said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Camaro said:

Sometimes I really do wonder who polices this stuff as this just isn't fair, being honest.

Insurance isn't about fairness, but about statistics. Which is how it should be. There are people paying a hell of a lot more than you because of things they can't do anything about, like their age. It's not fair that a teenager pays more for car insurance than a 50 year old. The teenager had done nothing wrong. Or that the 50 y/o pays more for life insurance. Or that the bloke with cancer can't buy life insurance at all. None of it is fair. Welcome to life, it's not fair.

I would say the OP isn't being treated fairly and is being materially disadvantaged by the new insurer because the statistics aren't giving a full picture of what actually happened.

And you would be incorrect.

Care to explain but bear in mind you can use statistics to justify just about anything which is exactly what the insurance does.

That particular insurer's stats show that punters with a non fault claim go on to cost them more than punters with no claims. In the same way their stats show teenagers cost them a fortune, so get charged a fortune. There will be conscientious low risk teenagers who won't claim, so on them it's unfair, but it's not unfair to charge them on the basis that their risk is much higher.

So on the sample of one, their statistics show that risk.

Do the statistics from all of the other insurers show the same increase in risk?

No, that's why when you do an online quote, different insurers quote different prices for the same risk. They all have their own stats, which are their intellectual prpoerty, and they use that info to price risks in a way that they think will win them the business they think they can make money on.