Beware Insurance Quote Trick
Discussion
I received a flyer from Adrian Flux who I understand are specialists for high performance and classic cars. I had approached them for an insurance quote last year for my 996 Turbo but did not take a policy from them. They had obviously retained my details so the usual direct marketing - offering '5 great reasons to come back to Adrian Flux' etc.
When I rang them, I was surprised to be asked what I paid for the car.
I said it was irrelevant and that I have an independent valuation which I am happy to share and supply. The salesman said we ask what you paid for it and then we ask what it's worth. I said what I paid for it is irrelevant and that the only reason why this is asked in my view is so that in the event of a total loss the insurer argues and knocks down the agreed valuation. It is of no relevance to ask what the car was purchased for - I may have received the car free as an inheritance or I may have paid a bankrupt director £1 for the car.
At that point it got heated, I told them I would never deal with them or anyone else that asks such a question and told them never to contact me again. I said that I thought this is wholly irrelevant as the insurance is undertaken on the basis of a valuation not a purchase price.
I will NEVER have anything to do with them again and have sent them an email instructing them to remove me from their marketing database and to confirm in writing when they have done so.
BEWARE guys anyone who asks during a quotation process what you paid for the car. Valuing a Porsche when assessing a claim is not like opening a Glass's or CAP Guide for a Ford Mondeo as each car has to be judged on history, condition, mileage and specification. That's the reason for me to have opted for an Agreed Valuation basis in the event of a total loss. What the car was purchased for does not and should not come into it when assessing for an insurance quotation.
I felt fellow Porsche owners should be aware of this practice and potential implication in the event of a claim.
When I rang them, I was surprised to be asked what I paid for the car.
I said it was irrelevant and that I have an independent valuation which I am happy to share and supply. The salesman said we ask what you paid for it and then we ask what it's worth. I said what I paid for it is irrelevant and that the only reason why this is asked in my view is so that in the event of a total loss the insurer argues and knocks down the agreed valuation. It is of no relevance to ask what the car was purchased for - I may have received the car free as an inheritance or I may have paid a bankrupt director £1 for the car.
At that point it got heated, I told them I would never deal with them or anyone else that asks such a question and told them never to contact me again. I said that I thought this is wholly irrelevant as the insurance is undertaken on the basis of a valuation not a purchase price.
I will NEVER have anything to do with them again and have sent them an email instructing them to remove me from their marketing database and to confirm in writing when they have done so.
BEWARE guys anyone who asks during a quotation process what you paid for the car. Valuing a Porsche when assessing a claim is not like opening a Glass's or CAP Guide for a Ford Mondeo as each car has to be judged on history, condition, mileage and specification. That's the reason for me to have opted for an Agreed Valuation basis in the event of a total loss. What the car was purchased for does not and should not come into it when assessing for an insurance quotation.
I felt fellow Porsche owners should be aware of this practice and potential implication in the event of a claim.
If you paid £1 for the car, which was valued and insured for £30,000, do you think you would treat it as carefully as you would have done had you paid £30,000 for it? Of course it is still worth the same, but the potential is that it's perceived value, to you, might be less than it's actual value.
Equally, if you paid £1 for the car, but it is worth £30,000, then it's easy to see that if you write it off, you will have £29,999 in cash which you did not have prior to purchasing the car.
So do you not think that it is in fact a perfectly reasonable question for an insurance company to ask and that your answer might well inform the rate which you are offered?
Equally, if you paid £1 for the car, but it is worth £30,000, then it's easy to see that if you write it off, you will have £29,999 in cash which you did not have prior to purchasing the car.
So do you not think that it is in fact a perfectly reasonable question for an insurance company to ask and that your answer might well inform the rate which you are offered?
drjwilson said:
If you paid £1 for the car, which was valued and insured for £30,000, do you think you would treat it as carefully as you would have done had you paid £30,000 for it? Of course it is still worth the same, but the potential is that it's perceived value, to you, might be less than it's actual value.
Equally, if you paid £1 for the car, but it is worth £30,000, then it's easy to see that if you write it off, you will have £29,999 in cash which you did not have prior to purchasing the car.
So do you not think that it is in fact a perfectly reasonable question for an insurance company to ask and that your answer might well inform the rate which you are offered?
So on that basis I presume the premium is based on the £1 risk they are insuring? And yes I appreciate the risk is always a lot more because you could go and crash into a £1m car. But if you're suggesting what OP paid is relevant, would the premium reflect what is paid for it ie £1 in your example. Me doubts it, in which case it's irrelevant. Equally, if you paid £1 for the car, but it is worth £30,000, then it's easy to see that if you write it off, you will have £29,999 in cash which you did not have prior to purchasing the car.
So do you not think that it is in fact a perfectly reasonable question for an insurance company to ask and that your answer might well inform the rate which you are offered?
And if I inherit a Zonda, it's still a Zonda. I wouldn't treat it like a worthless Gareth Bale spurs shirt
OP, I think you have completely over-reacted. Apart from some statutory no-no's, an insurance co can ask whatever it wants about you and your steed to quote. So no need to get hot under the collar. You have absolutely no idea what they do on the basis of your answer (unless there is some part of the tale missing), so no need to get hot under the collar. Quite a lot of insurance companies ask that question, so no need to get hot under the collar.
However you are right not to insure with AF as in my experience they are an appalling insurance company. Definitely a reason to get hot under the collar
Bert
However you are right not to insure with AF as in my experience they are an appalling insurance company. Definitely a reason to get hot under the collar
Bert
I think most insurers ask about the value of the car - I'm guessing that if it falls within some sort of normal range for the car in question they go no further with the figure. But if you state the value of the car is 50K when all the others of the same type/age average 25K that will trigger something. But just a guess.
Alpinestars said:
So on that basis I presume the premium is based on the £1 risk they are insuring? And yes I appreciate the risk is always a lot more because you could go and crash into a £1m car. But if you're suggesting what OP paid is relevant, would the premium reflect what is paid for it ie £1 in your example. Me doubts it, in which case it's irrelevant.
And if I inherit a Zonda, it's still a Zonda. I wouldn't treat it like a worthless Gareth Bale spurs shirt
No, I'm not (hypothetically) disputing that the car is worth exactly what OP says it is worth, and, if I'm the insurer, that's what i'm up for in the event his chariot is written off, especially in the case of an agreed value. What I *am* suggesting is that the amount he actually paid for the vehicle is a factor that alters the risk that I might have to make that payout, due to either of the scenarios I laid out above, or indeed other factors. I'm not suggesting for one second that OP will treat his car like junk, or use it to commit a fraud, but statistically if the purchase price is much less than the value, the risk of one of those two things occuring has increased, and therefore it's a fair thing for an insurer to take into account when pricing a quote. And if I inherit a Zonda, it's still a Zonda. I wouldn't treat it like a worthless Gareth Bale spurs shirt
drjwilson said:
No, I'm not (hypothetically) disputing that the car is worth exactly what OP says it is worth, and, if I'm the insurer, that's what i'm up for in the event his chariot is written off, especially in the case of an agreed value. What I *am* suggesting is that the amount he actually paid for the vehicle is a factor that alters the risk that I might have to make that payout, due to either of the scenarios I laid out above, or indeed other factors. I'm not suggesting for one second that OP will treat his car like junk, or use it to commit a fraud, but statistically if the purchase price is much less than the value, the risk of one of those two things occuring has increased, and therefore it's a fair thing for an insurer to take into account when pricing a quote.
But there are a whole load of other factors that would also need to be taken into account for that kind of risk assessment. Let's say he paid £30k for the car, but only earns £12k a year, has been saving for the last 9 years for his first ever 911 and has £10k of that £30k on finance. Wouldn't that make the perceived value to him much higher than somebody who has £££££££££s in the bank, bought a similar car for £40k because his last bonus was about that and he fancied trying one?Having said that, I do think the OP over-reacted a tad.
where is the insurance quote trick bit ?
they ask what you paid you said "I am not telling you"
that's a lot of under hand tricky going on there lol
if any one asked me I just quote the top price of a car for sale on Pistonheads.
or as others have said say it was free and hence why you have a value cert !!
they ask what you paid you said "I am not telling you"
that's a lot of under hand tricky going on there lol
if any one asked me I just quote the top price of a car for sale on Pistonheads.
or as others have said say it was free and hence why you have a value cert !!
cheshire911 said:
I received a flyer from Adrian Flux who I understand are specialists for high performance and classic cars. I had approached them for an insurance quote last year for my 996 Turbo but did not take a policy from them. They had obviously retained my details so the usual direct marketing - offering '5 great reasons to come back to Adrian Flux' etc.
When I rang them, I was surprised to be asked what I paid for the car.
I said it was irrelevant and that I have an independent valuation which I am happy to share and supply. The salesman said we ask what you paid for it and then we ask what it's worth. I said what I paid for it is irrelevant and that the only reason why this is asked in my view is so that in the event of a total loss the insurer argues and knocks down the agreed valuation. It is of no relevance to ask what the car was purchased for - I may have received the car free as an inheritance or I may have paid a bankrupt director £1 for the car.
At that point it got heated, I told them I would never deal with them or anyone else that asks such a question and told them never to contact me again. I said that I thought this is wholly irrelevant as the insurance is undertaken on the basis of a valuation not a purchase price.
I will NEVER have anything to do with them again and have sent them an email instructing them to remove me from their marketing database and to confirm in writing when they have done so.
BEWARE guys anyone who asks during a quotation process what you paid for the car. Valuing a Porsche when assessing a claim is not like opening a Glass's or CAP Guide for a Ford Mondeo as each car has to be judged on history, condition, mileage and specification. That's the reason for me to have opted for an Agreed Valuation basis in the event of a total loss. What the car was purchased for does not and should not come into it when assessing for an insurance quotation.
I felt fellow Porsche owners should be aware of this practice and potential implication in the event of a claim.
heated. really?When I rang them, I was surprised to be asked what I paid for the car.
I said it was irrelevant and that I have an independent valuation which I am happy to share and supply. The salesman said we ask what you paid for it and then we ask what it's worth. I said what I paid for it is irrelevant and that the only reason why this is asked in my view is so that in the event of a total loss the insurer argues and knocks down the agreed valuation. It is of no relevance to ask what the car was purchased for - I may have received the car free as an inheritance or I may have paid a bankrupt director £1 for the car.
At that point it got heated, I told them I would never deal with them or anyone else that asks such a question and told them never to contact me again. I said that I thought this is wholly irrelevant as the insurance is undertaken on the basis of a valuation not a purchase price.
I will NEVER have anything to do with them again and have sent them an email instructing them to remove me from their marketing database and to confirm in writing when they have done so.
BEWARE guys anyone who asks during a quotation process what you paid for the car. Valuing a Porsche when assessing a claim is not like opening a Glass's or CAP Guide for a Ford Mondeo as each car has to be judged on history, condition, mileage and specification. That's the reason for me to have opted for an Agreed Valuation basis in the event of a total loss. What the car was purchased for does not and should not come into it when assessing for an insurance quotation.
I felt fellow Porsche owners should be aware of this practice and potential implication in the event of a claim.
anyway it's a 996 turbo so £25k at a push on a good day if you're lucky no matter how much you polish it
, valuing it is no different from a mondeodo you have a branded key ring?
At least it stirred up a bit of debate on PH. No replies on 911uk.com :
http://www.911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=86004
http://www.911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=86004
Guys, there is a simple choice - either proceed with their quote process or decline.
I chose to decline because I'm of the opinion it doesn't matter a jot what was paid for the car. I posted on 911uk to let fellow Porkers know and expressed my view. It doesn't matter if it attracts a response - look at how many views it has had - the number is steadily increasing - so more people are aware than before of this practice. They can then choose what they do with that info about Adrian Flux.
Finally, all info that is offered in a quotation process is shared on a common insurers database. No problem with that concept if it wipes off the uninsured and fraudulent drivers. But the starting piint is the information must be relevant to assessing the risk. The purcahse price is totally irrelevant to assessing the risk. End of story. Other readers can decide what they want to do if they are asked this question.
I chose to decline because I'm of the opinion it doesn't matter a jot what was paid for the car. I posted on 911uk to let fellow Porkers know and expressed my view. It doesn't matter if it attracts a response - look at how many views it has had - the number is steadily increasing - so more people are aware than before of this practice. They can then choose what they do with that info about Adrian Flux.
Finally, all info that is offered in a quotation process is shared on a common insurers database. No problem with that concept if it wipes off the uninsured and fraudulent drivers. But the starting piint is the information must be relevant to assessing the risk. The purcahse price is totally irrelevant to assessing the risk. End of story. Other readers can decide what they want to do if they are asked this question.
I really don't understand the point of this rant.
The question asked should be completely irrelevant so long as the policy references either an agreed value OR market value. That is the basis on which you should consider the policy, and no other. What you happened to pay should not compromise the potential payout unless the insurance contract and their T&C's state otherwise. Have you examined the documents ?
I'm not sure why you have gotten so bent out of shape and decided to go ape at the guy on the phone.
There may be other reasons not to take insurance with AF but as you haven't made reference to them in your OP I won't either.
The question asked should be completely irrelevant so long as the policy references either an agreed value OR market value. That is the basis on which you should consider the policy, and no other. What you happened to pay should not compromise the potential payout unless the insurance contract and their T&C's state otherwise. Have you examined the documents ?
I'm not sure why you have gotten so bent out of shape and decided to go ape at the guy on the phone.
There may be other reasons not to take insurance with AF but as you haven't made reference to them in your OP I won't either.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff