Why is an
Author
Discussion

StuA9

Original Poster:

178 posts

234 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Old 05 mk5 Golf 2.0 gttdi automatic more to insure than an old A4 b7 2.0 tdi quattro ie around £160. I would have thought the quattro would be more.

Dog Biscuit

898 posts

13 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Buyer demographics

The old golf is popular with the bruvs innit

Quattr04.

626 posts

7 months

Saturday
quotequote all
For the same reason any car can be more to insure

More of them,more of them crashed, harder to get parts, they type of people driving them and the amount of accidents they’re in

Probably the same reason it was cheaper for me to insure a 2.0T Volvo s60 than a 1.0 Vauxhall Corsa

Baldchap

9,172 posts

108 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Primarily in order:

Cost to repair.
Statistical risk.

StuA9

Original Poster:

178 posts

234 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Quattr04. said:
For the same reason any car can be more to insure

More of them,more of them crashed, harder to get parts, they type of people driving them and the amount of accidents they’re in

Probably the same reason it was cheaper for me to insure a 2.0T Volvo s60 than a 1.0 Vauxhall Corsa
I guess, that is mad but know what you mean. I guess they think that people with old A4 b7's are generally the sensible type than the Golf gttdi type.

Olivergt

1,998 posts

97 months

Saturday
quotequote all
StuA9 said:
I guess, that is mad but know what you mean. I guess they think that people with old A4 b7's are generally the sensible type than the Golf gttdi type.
They don't "think", that A4 buyers are more sensible, they actually have the statistics to back it up, hence the difference in price.

I would imagine there is very little "thinking" going on in insurance, it's all based on statistics and probabilities which when you plug in all the criteria, spits out a number.

Roger Irrelevant

3,226 posts

129 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Olivergt said:
They don't "think", that A4 buyers are more sensible, they actually have the statistics to back it up, hence the difference in price.

I would imagine there is very little "thinking" going on in insurance, it's all based on statistics and probabilities which when you plug in all the criteria, spits out a number.
Spot on - you don't have meetings of actuaries where they have discussions like 'Right, how much are we going to charge 2006 Golf Tdi drivers?' 'Hmmm I see a few of those driven by oiks round my way, you know the sort that drive around with their hoods up, I reckon we should charge them a fair bit' 'Right OK then we'll rinse the Golf drivers, now, what about 2005 Audi A4s?' 'Oh I reckon they'll attract a slightly better sort, so still charge a fair bit but less than the Golf', 'Good stuff. Next - what do think about jockeys?' 'Can't stand the little horsey bds, we'll rip them right off and use the extra to give a discount to vicars'.

Josemartinez

52 posts

6 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Roger Irrelevant said:
Spot on - you don't have meetings of actuaries where they have discussions like 'Right, how much are we going to charge 2006 Golf Tdi drivers?' 'Hmmm I see a few of those driven by oiks round my way, you know the sort that drive around with their hoods up, I reckon we should charge them a fair bit' 'Right OK then we'll rinse the Golf drivers, now, what about 2005 Audi A4s?' 'Oh I reckon they'll attract a slightly better sort, so still charge a fair bit but less than the Golf', 'Good stuff. Next - what do think about jockeys?' 'Can't stand the little horsey bds, we'll rip them right off and use the extra to give a discount to vicars'.
That last bit about jockeys made me laugh.

Inbox

121 posts

2 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Josemartinez said:
Roger Irrelevant said:
Spot on - you don't have meetings of actuaries where they have discussions like 'Right, how much are we going to charge 2006 Golf Tdi drivers?' 'Hmmm I see a few of those driven by oiks round my way, you know the sort that drive around with their hoods up, I reckon we should charge them a fair bit' 'Right OK then we'll rinse the Golf drivers, now, what about 2005 Audi A4s?' 'Oh I reckon they'll attract a slightly better sort, so still charge a fair bit but less than the Golf', 'Good stuff. Next - what do think about jockeys?' 'Can't stand the little horsey bds, we'll rip them right off and use the extra to give a discount to vicars'.
That last bit about jockeys made me laugh.
The way premiums get calculated is so opaque (you can prove almost anything with statistics) I really wouldn't be surprised if there was an element of truth in that.

Pica-Pica

15,273 posts

100 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Inbox said:
The way premiums get calculated is so opaque (you can prove almost anything with statistics) I really wouldn't be surprised if there was an element of truth in that.
You really believe insurers can afford to be so cavalier and go against the figures?

kambites

69,746 posts

237 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
Inbox said:
The way premiums get calculated is so opaque (you can prove almost anything with statistics) I really wouldn't be surprised if there was an element of truth in that.
You really believe insurers can afford to be so cavalier and go against the figures?
yes They will all have different slightly different. models, data-sets to work from and different approaches to how to price risks for which they have limited data, but ultimately insurers live or die by the accuracy of their statistical models. They can't afford to under-estimate risk for obvious reasons, but since insurance is so competitive they also can't afford to over-estimate them for customers they actually want.

They neither know nor care why a particular car, or particular area or whatever has a higher or lower risk than another; they just care that it does.

Inbox

121 posts

2 months

Saturday
quotequote all
kambites said:
Pica-Pica said:
Inbox said:
The way premiums get calculated is so opaque (you can prove almost anything with statistics) I really wouldn't be surprised if there was an element of truth in that.
You really believe insurers can afford to be so cavalier and go against the figures?
yes They will all have different slightly different. models, data-sets to work from and different approaches to how to price risks for which they have limited data, but ultimately insurers live or die by the accuracy of their statistical models. They can't afford to under-estimate risk for obvious reasons, but since insurance is so competitive they also can't afford to over-estimate them for customers they actually want.

They neither know nor care why a particular car, or particular area or whatever has a higher or lower risk than another; they just care that it does.
My issue is that the process is opaque, on the one hand you have long term risk trends and on the other short term risk transients and your premium is the result of a badly designed transient response in a control loop. If you ask why the premium doubled last year and halved this they won't or can't explain it.

And of course they don't care, the customer will always pay! What choice do they have.