Are young people been conditioned for life long rip off in..

[Gad-Westy]

Coming back to the original question about whether young people are being conditioned to pay more? Well that would imply some sort of agreement between every single main stream insurer in a heavily regulated private industry that they will all milk young people for all they've got, and not one of them would break rank and undercut everyone and clean up? I'm afraid, even being a little cynical, I cannot believe that for a second. As someone else said, would you set up your own insurer and offer lower rate insurance to young people? I know I wouldn't.

I think there are a few things going on here. Costs are going up, injury claims, airbag detonations, huge crumple zones, hire car usage etc. Not to mention that there are more people squeezing onto the road than ever before. Somebody has to pay for it all and I'm afraid that young/inexperience drivers will always be (rightly) perceived as high risk and are therefore burdened with higher premiums. I cannot see another way I'm afraid.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Gad-Westy said:

Coming back to the original question about whether young people are being conditioned to pay more? Well that would imply some sort of agreement between every single main stream insurer in a heavily regulated private industry that they will all milk young people for all they've got, and not one of them would break rank and undercut everyone and clean up? I'm afraid, even being a little cynical, I cannot believe that for a second. As someone else said, would you set up your own insurer and offer lower rate insurance to young people? I know I wouldn't.

I think there are a few things going on here. Costs are going up, injury claims, airbag detonations, huge crumple zones, hire car usage etc. Not to mention that there are more people squeezing onto the road than ever before. Somebody has to pay for it all and I'm afraid that young/inexperience drivers will always be (rightly) perceived as high risk and are therefore burdened with higher premiums. I cannot see another way I'm afraid.

Don't cloud the issue with facts.

[culpz]

Triumph Man said:

Not sure if that's in reference to me, but I've got 8 years NCB, live in a BA12 postcode, and have both my Girlfriend (who I live with) and my dad (who I don't) on the policy. Dad's been on my policies since the year dot. Employed full time, est mileage 12,000 per annum. That's with Hastings direct

The 520i is on a classic policy, just me, agreed limited mileage.

No, i meant that for the OP. Sorry, should have specified.

[skyrover]

Been paying roughly £280 to insure a Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.0 since I was in my late 20's

I'm 32 now and the amount I pay has not really changed in several years.

[Leins]

PositronicRay said:

Have you ever considered insurance is a competitive market? Maybe these rates are just what it costs.

If an insurance company could dramatically reduce premiums they'd just go to the market and clean up.

One of the privileges about getting older are reduced premiums, until you're really old then they'll start to increase again.

Quite a number involved in the Irish motor insurance industry are currently being investigated by the EU for cartel running: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news...

Funnily enough, premiums now seem to be dropping slightly of late, after a few years of rapid rises

A lot of the insurance providers who have tried to significantly undercut the market here did "clean up" for a while, particularly in the late 90s to mid-00s and targeting younger drivers. However, most went to the wall, leaving significant debts and why we all have to pay a 5% levy on all our policies now

Edited by Leins on Wednesday 20th September 09:12

[SteellFJ]

kambites said:

What does it score on here: http://www.motorcarinsuranceuk.co.uk/post-code-rat... ?

This was interesting, I don't understand why Glasgow so high on all counts.

G Glasgow
1-5, 11, 13-15, 20-23, 31-34, 40-42, 51, 53 . . Refer
12, 43-46, 66, 69, 71-78, 81 . . . . . E *
60-62, 64, 67-68, 82 . . . . . . . . . . D *
52, 63, 83-84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B
65 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C

Especially when Edinburgh's motorbike crime is much higher:

EH Edinburgh
43-46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
26-27, 38-42, 55 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B
23, 28-37, 47, 49, 51-54 . . . . . . . . . C
11-13, 15-22, 24-25, 48 . . . . . . . . D*
1-10, 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E *

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Leins said:

A lot of the insurance providers who have tried to significantly undercut the market here did "clean up" for a while, particularly in the late 90s to mid-00s and targeting younger drivers. However, most went to the wall, leaving significant debts

They cleaned up for a while....yeah, until the claims started to roll in.

I could offer everyone whose insurance is due this week insurance for a tenner. I'd clean up for a while.....until next week when the first accidents occurred.

[lyonspride]

Car insurance is like wages, if you don't move around every few years, they'll take the piss.


When it comes to young drivers and car insurance, the risk per mile is lower than for the over 60's, but the insurance companies are very clever, grouping people by age, location, car type etc, etc, is not just about level of risk, it's about "divide and conquer", it lets them hike premiums without a huge national backlash.

First they came for the young drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not a young driver.

Then they came for the elderly drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not an elderly driver.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

Edited by lyonspride on Wednesday 20th September 10:09

[bad company]

bristolracer said:

You are under 30 and driving a 5 series?
Buy the 1.2 fiesta and pay £700

Do you really think that it was any cheaper for us (relatively) to insure a 5 series when we're in our 20's?

This.

In 1973 I paid £130 (£1578 in today's money) to insure my 1600cc Cortina.

[lufbramatt]

It's not your age, I'm early 30's and it seems most stuff I get quotes on is around ~£300-£400. Oddly both my cars were £300 to insure this year (BMW 530i and a Honda Jazz) despite the BMW having over twice the power of the Jazz.

I've had the 530i since I was 29 and it's always been about the same price to insure.

That's with Chris Knott using the discount code from the BMW5 Forum. Not sure how much difference that made but they were happy to beat any quote by £20. Even at renewal both polices went down a few quid and were cheaper than anything else I could find.

[Speed 3]

MCLARENSLR said:

kambites said:

What does it score on here: http://www.motorcarinsuranceuk.co.uk/post-code-rat... ?

Based on the areas I know well I would say that looks like it's about 15 years old.

I'd say its utter bks. We're rated E* in an area with one of the lowest crime rates in the country. A neighbouring postcode is A so I tried quoting one of our cars with our current address and one in the A rated on exactly like-for-like drivers & cover. Current postcode came in at £434 Admiral / £466 More Than and with the much better rated postcode £936 / £676 respectively......

What this tells me is the postcode does have a dramatic effect and its different between insurers but don't take any notice of that site, just do a comparison yourself.

[TwistingMyMelon]

35 here insurance is usually £200-600 on mainstream cars (nothing too mental), never going for the cheapest and staying with reputable companies

Been paying about £300 last few years with legal cover and fully comp

10 years + no claims, low risk area, low risk job title and 10k a year miles aka Mr boring

[kambites]

Speed 3 said:

What this tells me is the postcode does have a dramatic effect and its different between insurers but don't take any notice of that site, just do a comparison yourself.

Probably a fair point, but I'd still challenge the OP's assertion that he's in a "decent post code" with the numbers he's quoting.

[Pica-Pica]

lyonspride said:

Car insurance is like wages, if you don't move around every few years, they'll take the piss.


When it comes to young drivers and car insurance, the risk per mile is lower than for the over 60's, but the insurance companies are very clever, grouping people by age, location, car type etc, etc, is not just about level of risk, it's about "divide and conquer", it lets them hike premiums without a huge national backlash.

First they came for the young drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not a young driver.

Then they came for the elderly drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not an elderly driver.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

Edited by lyonspride on Wednesday 20th September 10:09

How do you evidence your statement that younger drivers are a lower risk than over 60s?
Also do not paraphrase Martin Niemöller's poem, not even comparable.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

lyonspride said:

but the insurance companies are very clever, grouping people by age, location, car type etc, etc, is not just about level of risk, it's about "divide and conquer", it lets them hike premiums without a huge national backlash.

Probably the biggest load of cobblers I've read on here, and wow, there's plenty of competition.

How do you asses level of risk, if not by age, location, car type etc? What do you suggest, star sign and fave breakfast cereal.

Do you seriously not realise that teenagers are a higher risk than middle aged people, that a Nissan GTR is a higher risk than a Nissan Micra, or that living in Central Liverpool is a higher risk than the Shetlands.

Are you on mindbending drugs?

[Gad-Westy]

There seems to be a prevailing notion that the insurance industry is one 'entity'. I guess that might come from the fact that -unlike just about everything else- there is a legal requirement to have vehicle insurance, if you use a vehicle on the public road at least. So it feels like a public service, a monopoly or whatever you want to call it but the reality is that it's 100's of private companies competing for your £'s.

That is why the idea of some sort of cartel/industry agreement seems so far fetched to me. I somehow cannot imagine that Churchill the dog and the Admiral are having hushed conversations in a quiet corner of the masonic lodge to agrees all this. Maybe it was more feasible prior to the days of price comparison sites where people weren't shopping around so much but these days, when 100's of insurers lay their prices out in front of you with a few clicks of the mouse? Seems like tin foil hat stuff to me.

[Bradley1500]

You must be doing something wrong, or there is some underlying risk that is making insurance companies load your premium.

MikeyMike said:

I think that's exactly what it is, you've only been driving for 5 years, presumably that puts you in the same bracket as most 22 year olds who passed at 17.

I am 22 and have been driving five years, the same as the OP. I have a non-fault claim to contend with too, yet I pay less to insure my modified twin turbo Toyota Supra.

A BMW 520D would cost me around £500-£600 to insure, depending on the exact details.

Benjijames28 said:

kambites said:

What does it score on here: http://www.motorcarinsuranceuk.co.uk/post-code-rat... ?

F*

That said, my postcode is C rated, so I suspect this is making a big difference.

Try different addresses to see what difference it makes to your premium?

[Roger Irrelevant]

lyonspride said:

Car insurance is like wages, if you don't move around every few years, they'll take the piss.


When it comes to young drivers and car insurance, the risk per mile is lower than for the over 60's, but the insurance companies are very clever, grouping people by age, location, car type etc, etc, is not just about level of risk, it's about "divide and conquer", it lets them hike premiums without a huge national backlash.

First they came for the young drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not a young driver.

Then they came for the elderly drivers, and I did not speak out.
Because i'm not an elderly driver.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

Edited by lyonspride on Wednesday 20th September 10:09

Bloody hell - I was about to pen an 'Insurance thread bingo' post playing on the fact that these threads are always the same. But then I saw your post drawing equivalences between car insurers and the perpetrators of the final solution. As Harry Hill might say - I certainly didn't expect to see that!

[xjay1337]

Gad-Westy said:

There seems to be a prevailing notion that the insurance industry is one 'entity'. I guess that might come from the fact that -unlike just about everything else- there is a legal requirement to have vehicle insurance, if you use a vehicle on the public road at least. So it feels like a public service, a monopoly or whatever you want to call it but the reality is that it's 100's of private companies competing for your £'s.

That is why the idea of some sort of cartel/industry agreement seems so far fetched to me. I somehow cannot imagine that Churchill the dog and the Admiral are having hushed conversations in a quiet corner of the masonic lodge to agrees all this. Maybe it was more feasible prior to the days of price comparison sites where people weren't shopping around so much but these days, when 100's of insurers lay their prices out in front of you with a few clicks of the mouse? Seems like tin foil hat stuff to me.

While there are many, many insurance companies, you may be surprised to find out that there are not very many underwriters.
So many companies that you approach are merely brokers.

My policy for my Fiesta for example is underwritten by AXA. However AXA directly offered me a higher price. Makes no sense.
There is obviously something going on, would I call it a cartel? Probably not. But when there are companies like Elephant, Admiral, Bell which are THE SAME COMPANY yet offer different prices, even if they are then underwritten by the same company, you do wonder....

[Sheepshanks]

Gad-Westy said:

That is why the idea of some sort of cartel/industry agreement seems so far fetched to me. I somehow cannot imagine that Churchill the dog and the Admiral are having hushed conversations in a quiet corner of the masonic lodge to agrees all this.

Sure - but they're all looking at each others premiums though. And the reason they're doing that isn't to benefit consumers.