Insurance - Any recommendations?

[George H]

Bincenzo said:

Rather disappointingly, Locktons won't insure me because I'm a Member of Her Majesty's Armed Forces.

Wow, that's absolute bks, properly ridiculous. This sounds like the sort of story the press would love though

[Murph7355]

George H said:

Wow, that's absolute bks, properly ridiculous. This sounds like the sort of story the press would love though

I'm sorry guys, but insurers "discriminate" against all sorts of people - old, young, men, people with not much experience, people with points, people who drive their cars...

Not defending the way they load their premiums per se, or the amounts they load them by, and personally I think there should be much more visibility of how premiums are loaded. But to think that insurers don't "discriminate" is naive. And being brutal, and noting that I have the utmost respect for our armed forces, from a risk perspective it's just another job classification.

My premiums aren't what I'd called cheap, but I wouldn't want them being more expensive because insurers weren't allowed to load the premiums of those they consider higher risk.

There are plenty of other insurance companies out there. No point getting hot under the collar about it, just take your business elsewhere.

It's also worth noting that Locktons are a broker IIRC. The rules are not theirs.

Btw, I had to be an AMOC member to go with Locktons. But the fee and membership were "free" with the policy.

[Riccardino]

Murph7355 said:

I'm sorry guys, but insurers "discriminate" against all sorts of people - old, young, men, people with not much experience, people with points, people who drive their cars...

That is true (in Switzerland also nationality was included but at least insurance were cheaper in my experience) but I see a reason why certain categories would potentially require an higher premium based on statistics etc.
I would understand an higher premium for a life insurance of somebody working in the army but for a car insurance I do not really understand.
Is people working in the army proven to be more dangerous when driving or causing more severa car accidents? are their cars stolen more often?
I as just cuorious to understand the reason as I cannot figure out one myself

[Murph7355]

Riccardino said:

That is true (in Switzerland also nationality was included but at least insurance were cheaper in my experience) but I see a reason why certain categories would potentially require an higher premium based on statistics etc.
I would understand an higher premium for a life insurance of somebody working in the army but for a car insurance I do not really understand.
Is people working in the army proven to be more dangerous when driving or causing more severa car accidents? are their cars stolen more often?
I as just cuorious to understand the reason as I cannot figure out one myself

This is what I was referring to when I mentioned transparency.

But for a firm to simply refuse a category (rather than just load the premium) there *must* be a reason and I would guess that their experience drives this.

Looking anecdotally at one's sphere of exposure isn't the same as looking at masses of claim records and policy details (hundreds of millions overall at least I would think). After all, my view of 17yr old boys (when I was one) was that they were safe drivers "in my experience"...evidently there are stats to prove otherwise though.

I have little idea why any one category *should* be more risky. But we have to accept that they are.

[michael gould]

Totally agree with Murph and George on this one.....with the greatest respect to the OP, he is a pilot in the Armed forces and you can hardly expect his risk profile to be the same as say a Charted Accountant.

[snuffy]

Murph7355 said:

I'm sorry guys, but insurers "discriminate" against all sorts of people - old, young, men, people with not much experience, people with points, people who drive their cars...

I was going to say that. Insurance companies look at a risk profile ( occupation, age, type of car, where you live, where you park it at night ) of a person to determine the price they charge ( you could say they charge what they can get away with, but that's a different argument ).

[George H]

michael gould said:

Totally agree with Murph and George on this one.....with the greatest respect to the OP, he is a pilot in the Armed forces and you can hardly expect his risk profile to be the same as say a Charted Accountant.

Maybe so, but how does a pilot suddenly become a higher risk of crashing a car?

[Bincenzo]

George H said:

michael gould said:

Totally agree with Murph and George on this one.....with the greatest respect to the OP, he is a pilot in the Armed forces and you can hardly expect his risk profile to be the same as say a Charted Accountant.

Maybe so, but how does a pilot suddenly become a higher risk of crashing a car?

George, my point precisely. Moreover, I find it strange that they include it in their terms and conditions that they will not insure any member of the Forces - point blank. I could accept some additional loading. Yes, as a military aviator, I have no doubt my risk profile is high, although this shows an element of naivity on the brokers part. Military aviation, whilst inherently dangerous as an occupation, does not breed maverick type individuals (particulalry the older variants!), so there should be no correlation between job and driving in this instance. Members of the Forces are not special cases, and should not be treated as such either way. I'm not asking for discounts, nor would I expect to be disadvataged. Just seems a bit of a shame, and I am aware there are many more brokers available and will continue my search. Lively and interesting debate, though, from what started off as a 'dull' subject!

[AMDBSNick]

Morning Chaps,

I asked our resident motor insurance man and I detail his reply.

"Terrorist target ( individual or barracks where car parked )
Armed forces can attract a certain type of person
Known to party hard/drink
Vehicle could be parked airside

Some Insurers as always are underwriting on reputation not always the facts. We do deal with some insurers that like them !"

Mods this is not an advert just joining in

[snuffy]

I recall someone ( Alan Davies I think ) on QI (or something similar) complaining that he has to pay more in car insurance because he is a comedian. He said "What do they think I'm going to do ? Drive my car in a funny way ?"

But the point is, someone must have worked out that people in TV/entertainment etc have a higher claims profile. On an individual basis these things often don't make sense, but given a large sample they might. Not every young lad drives like a knob, but as a group they make a lot of claims, so if you are young you get a whacking premium.

[Bincenzo]

AMDBSNick said:

Morning Chaps,

I asked our resident motor insurance man and I detail his reply.

"Terrorist target ( individual or barracks where car parked )
Armed forces can attract a certain type of person
Known to party hard/drink
Vehicle could be parked airside

Some Insurers as always are underwriting on reputation not always the facts. We do deal with some insurers that like them !"

Mods this is not an advert just joining in

Nick, thanks for the insight. Nothing at all contentious in the reply there, as the Forces are a large organisation who employ a certain type of people to do a certain type of job, but the fact remains, we're not all Rambo nutters who drive like lunatics and get legless before driving naked around an airfield. I do get the point though!

[Grant3]

Mark.. Insurance aside due respect to your talents. A pilot and an Aston owner, now that's
Let me know when your offering test flights

[George H]

AMDBSNick said:

Morning Chaps,

I asked our resident motor insurance man and I detail his reply.

"Terrorist target ( individual or barracks where car parked )
Armed forces can attract a certain type of person
Known to party hard/drink
Vehicle could be parked airside

Some Insurers as always are underwriting on reputation not always the facts. We do deal with some insurers that like them !"

Mods this is not an advert just joining in

Could he not just start his own company and call himself a managing director on insurance documents then?

[Bincenzo]

Grant3 said:

Mark.. Insurance aside due respect to your talents. A pilot and an Aston owner, now that's
Let me know when your offering test flights

Grant, very, very kind words, thank you. But, it's just a job and there are sooo many people capable of doing it, they just haven't been as lucky as I was to end up actually taking it on as a profession.

Now then, back to inventing that company....

[AMDBSNick]

George H said:

Could he not just start his own company and call himself a managing director on insurance documents then?

George if only it were that simple. Anyhow I'm thinking I might subsidise Mark's premium for a quick spin in his jet. Mark, like it or lump it you have the coolest job in the world and one of the coolest (excluding the number of cylinders) cars
BTW we are only a broker. My experts comments are what underwriters think - not us

Edited by AMDBSNick on Friday 31st August 09:44

[michael gould]

Could he not just start his own company and call himself a managing director on insurance documents then?
[/quote]

I dont think that would be in thew spirit of the golden rule of insurance "utmost good faith" you have to disclose all the risk factors

[George H]

michael gould said:

I dont think that would be in thew spirit of the golden rule of insurance "utmost good faith" you have to disclose all the risk factors

I've never had an insurance company deal with me with 'upmost good faith'. More like 'screw him at every possible oppertunity'.

If you were a managing director of a company I can't see why you would be lieing? The company doesn't have to turn over anything for you to have that title.

[Riccardino]

michael gould said:

Totally agree with Murph and George on this one.....with the greatest respect to the OP, he is a pilot in the Armed forces and you can hardly expect his risk profile to be the same as say a Charted Accountant.

Sorry but I still do not understand
This is not a life insurance! Actually I may think that a pilot might have skills which might eventually improve his risk profile when driving a car

AMDBSNick said:

Morning Chaps,

I asked our resident motor insurance man and I detail his reply.

"Terrorist target ( individual or barracks where car parked )
Armed forces can attract a certain type of person
Known to party hard/drink
Vehicle could be parked airside

Some Insurers as always are underwriting on reputation not always the facts. We do deal with some insurers that like them !"

At least something more understandable regarding the reason.
Have to say that really they can "create" any sort of risk for any sort of category then to either not insure or to charge more

As said in thread priviously probably one should just look for another insurer then

Edited by Riccardino on Friday 31st August 10:03

[Neil1300R]

George H said:

I've never had an insurance company deal with me with 'upmost good faith'. More like 'screw him at every possible oppertunity'.

If you were a managing director of a company I can't see why you would be lieing? The company doesn't have to turn over anything for you to have that title.

You're forgetting the bit where it asks "Do you have another Occupation". He will not be an MD full time.

[Grant3]

Just double checked this and it isn't black and white - Locktons won't insure airside (they say no personal car insurance policy covers this??) but they will insure armed forces/pilots (obviously according to individual circumstances). Mark it is worth double checking this, pm me if you want a contact.