|
I recently had a renewal notice for my current insurer SAGA, £303 When I researched the same cover on a comparison site I got a quote of £195, from SAGA! I rang them up to query the difference and was calmly told that the comparison site quoted me as a new customer. In fact I have already insured for £210 elsewhere so I am sorted until this time next year but it is no way to generate customer loyalty! I got £140 off my AA renewal with one phone call and colleague tells me he got £600 of two car's insurance by doing the new customer route.
|
|
Loyalty is an expensive business. It pays to shop round or haggle.
|
The following are made up figures for illustration;
Assume;
Quote for "new" policy £80
Quote for "existing" policy £100
1,000 policy holders.
Assume no additional [new] customers.
Give everyone "new" premium (discount).
Previous revenue = £100 * 1000 = £100,000
New revenue = £80 * 1000 = £80,000
Give only those people who query their premium the "new" premium.
80% renew
10% leave never to return
10 query and get lower premium
Revenue now;
80% simply renew = £100 * 800 = £80,000
10% query and get "new" = £80 * 100 = £8,000
Revenue with this approach is £88,000. £8,000 more than giving everybody the new premium for everybody approach.
The insurers know this (so do Sky, Vodafone and everybody else who works on a renewable contract). They rely on accurately predicting and managing the percentage of people who will leave, the percentage of people who will query and the percentage of people who just pay.
Adding a renewals department can decrease the 10% who just leave, adding even further profit.
Offering the "new" premium to people who are not currently with you picks up even more customers.
If you simply renew without querying you are subsidizing the rest of us. Thank you.
So ALWAYS query ANY renewal premium.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 18 Nov 13 at 20:27
|
|
Amazing how cheap insurance is, if you factor in the alleged £80 we are all paying to subsidise whiplash and fraudulent claims
|
>>Amazing how cheap insurance is!
20 yrs ago @ aged 47 I was paying £450 x 2 for car insurance and £500 for contents (3 x Break-ins in 2 years). Full NCB on both cars, but nobody wanted to know me regarding house contents insurance!
Today I pay £184 for CRV, £150 for Mazda and £210 for the House & Contents = approx £550
The only consolation re the Break-ins is one of the culprits is now doing his 2nd 8 year stretch in the clink - he graduated from stealing mountain bikes and cars to serious crime and was caught again last year only months after release from the first 8 yr sentence.!
|
I need to insure a second car from next Saturday and ran a quick check on confused.com when we got home late last night only to be surprised at the cost.
Apparently my NCB is being used on the Fiesta and can't be used on any other car.
Ian has only insured his bike in the last 10 years and not a car so what's the best way to go with this.
I'm a bit confused.com myself as to what to put into the drop down menu which asks how much NCB do I have?
It won't allow me to put 9 years but being used on another vehicle but I suspect putting 'No NCB' is accounting for the high quotes.
Help Mark please!
Pat
|
|
Won't the dropdown box, or whatever, give you an option like "5+" for NCB Pat? What about transferring the NCB from the Fiesta, if that helps financially?
Last edited by: Meldrew on Tue 19 Nov 13 at 06:02
|
Have you looked at a 'multicar' policy, Pat? Some here have had good experiences with Admiral, I've found Aviva works better for me. Two cars, two drivers, both driving records taken into account.
You can start with one car, then add the other when its current policy expires. Aviva gave me the premium for the second car in advance.
|
SQ
>> I need to insure a second car from next Saturday and ran a quick check
>> on confused.com when we got home late last night only to be surprised at the
>> cost.
>> Help Mark please!
I would speak to your current insurer first about adding a 2nd vehicle. They will at least offer a discount even if they won't let you use your NCD twice.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 20 Nov 13 at 01:50
|
|
NCD is applied per car so the new vehicle will not qualify for the discount. However as Skip say many Insurers will allow a second vehicle discount if you adding the vehicle to an existing policy and that may well be the best way to go.
|
>> I need to insure a second car from next Saturday and ran a quick check
>> on confused.com when we got home late last night only to be surprised at the
>> cost.
>>
>> Apparently my NCB is being used on the Fiesta and can't be used on any
>> other car.
Of course your NCB can be used on another car. Its a statement of risk, not a barrel of something with only one tap.
|
|
But if the main driver of the second car is not the person holding the NCB then I'd have thought it cannot be used. And if you are the main driver of both cars .... what will Ian be driving?
|
I don't know the "rules" for this but the practice I've always experienced in this situation is that NCD is attached to a single policy. However it's just a case of looking round for a multicar policy, introductory discount or similar that might get close to where you'd have been with the full NCD applied.
No use to you but for example Direct Line will fully apply a NCD to two policies but only if each policy is for the proposer only.
However... surely as Ian will be the main driver for one of the cars there is no option to him taking out a policy in his name with you as the named drived in which case your NCD is of no use getting the base policy price down anyway??
I'm guessing from what you say he will mostly use the Fiesta so you need a policy for him on that car.
|
>>"the main driver"<<<
don't get me started on this! Time, mileage, frequency of use? Integrated over what period of time? days, weeks, months, life of policy?
Try finding an insurer who understands, let alone can answer the questions is nigh on impossible.
Historically a NCD could only be applied to single policy but in these more competitive times there are an increasing number ogf companies who are more flexible in an attempt to win business.
|
>>>don't get me started on this! Time, mileage, frequency of use? Integrated over what period of time? days, weeks, months, life of policy?
Well what seems certain is that Pat can't claim to be the main driver of both vehicles... particularly if Ian is using one for the work commute in the winter. In the event of a claim the insurance company would tie them in knots with enquiries related to use/main driver at time of accident and it could all get very messy if found not to be correct.
|
>>
>> Well what seems certain is that Pat can't claim to be the main driver of
>> both vehicles...
No, but she can be the policyholder of both vehicles. The main driver doesn't have to be the policyholder - you just have to declare it.
|
You should probably change the Fiesta policy to the Volvo and take out new insurance on the Fiesta.
Ask your current insurer what they will charge for two vehicles.
When checking the internet for quotes, put in 3 yrs NCD. That is not accurate and won't correctly identify the insurers who will give you an introductory discount. However, it should give you a short list of a few appropriate insurers to ring and get a "real" quote. One should expect an ID of about that amount.
When you ring you simply say that you have both been substantial users of the same car with max NCD but now you can afford a second car. Totally normal and frequent.
Since your husband and wife it doesn't really who is the main user of which in real life. Just say you are on the Volvo (since that should be the most expensive base premium) - they would normally insist on rating one vehicle on each of you.
Since the difference is not likely to be material, then its not a material fact - if you see what I mean. You would only have to be careful if one of you was a much higher mileage or a significantly different risk - which is most unlikely.
The "Who is the main user?" question is there to stop parents insuring the child's car and similar.
I'd consider taking out the second policy in Ian's name. It may give you more flexibility in the future - e.g. things like business use and driving other cars which where given frequently only apply to the policy holder.
You can be the main user of both cars in real life, but your insurer will simply ignore that and rate one on each of you.
When is the renewal date of your existing policy?
|
And do remember what I always say, the amount you have to pay is what is important, not the discount.
10% off £100 is a better deal than 80% off £1000
|
The fiesta is in my name and has just been taken out last weekend for £151 comprehensive with Ian as a named driver. It is with M&S insurance so I reang them but the best they can do after juggling it about is £553 for both policies.
I have managed to find a quote for £259 78 for the Volvo for Ian as the main policy holder with no NCB and myself as a named driver which is quite a difference.
Pat
|
That doesn't sound too bad.
However, to be sure, ask your existing insurer simply for a change of vehicle quote from the Fiesta to the Volvo.
Ask the people who gave you that Volvo quote for Ian for a different quote with the Fiesta as the vehicle.
|
Thanks Mark, there is very little in it so I think we'll go with insuring it in Ian's name so he can start earning some NCB on a car as well.
Pat
|
Pat,
I might not have explained properly;
I think you've got quotes for
Pat / Fiesta / Max NCD
Ian / Volvo / Intro NCD
The discounts (NCD or ID) are given against the base premium and I would expect the Volvo to have a higher base premium.
So I would expect;
Pat / Volvo / Max NCD
Ian / Fiesta / Intro NCD
...to be cheaper if all else remained the same.
I certainly recommend Ian having his own policy either way for the reasons I gave above.
Or perhaps you checked that and I'm stating the obvious. If so, oops.
|
>> If so, oops.<<
Yes I did:) That's what took so long, now I really have to get on as I've agreed to do a training course starting at 3am tomorrow morning...that's customer service for you!
.....it will pay for the V70!
Pat
|
>> I recently had a renewal notice for my current insurer SAGA, £303 When I researched
>> the same cover on a comparison site I got a quote of £195, from SAGA!
>> I rang them up to query the difference and was calmly told that the comparison
>> site quoted me as a new customer.
What can happen (and it really isn't obvious) is that the policies are different, so it's not a like for like comparison.
You need to be really careful if going for the cheaper quote to make sure there's nothing that you rely on that is missing from the new policy and that anything you agreed in past with the insurer carries on to the new policy.
|
>>You need to be really careful if going for the cheaper quote to make sure there's nothing that you rely on that is missing from the new policy and that anything you agreed in past with the insurer carries on to the new policy.
Good advice. Think about things like business usage, DOC (driving other cars) rugs & clothing, glass, ICE, excess(es), driving abroad, driving restrictions, bonus protection conditions (n accidents in y years) etc. etc.
|
This might be a really silly question but I'm interested to know what the reality is.
In the past, I've insured the car I use the most with me as the main driver and my wife as the named driver. On the other hand, she insures the car she uses most with her as the main driver and me as the named. So far so good.
However, from time to time, we swopped cars on a fairly long term basis when it suited me to keep the miles down on one of them or didn't need the loadspace or whatever thus making me the main user of the other car for a while and by default the opposite for my wife.
So, the silly question is, how much does the panel think it's important to inform the respective insurance companies in that eventuality? It could have in my case become ridiculous in that I might have used hers and vice versa for a month and then switched back.
Or, you have the even more complex situation where she uses hers 5 times a week but only does 50 miles in total, whereas I use her's once a week but stick 400 miles on it in a day. Who's the main driver then? The one who uses it often or the one who uses it less so but actually does more miles in it?
We did take the precaution of insuring both of them for "business" use by the way.
Difficult isn't it?
Last edited by: Runfer D'Hills on Tue 19 Nov 13 at 15:19
|
It certainly is and I've tried to weigh that one up this morning.
Ian will use the Fiesta from November to end of February but will use neither car during the rest of the year apart from holidays when we share the towing.
I will use the Volvo in the winter months when Ian has the Fiesta...and I will use the Volvo whenever I have a choice:)
Pat
|
|
Now you have two cars is there not a saving to be made by getting rid of a bike? The Fiesta might be only used Nov-Feb otherwise and then you'll want to use the Volvo anyway ;-)
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 19 Nov 13 at 16:19
|
>> by getting rid of a bike? <<
That will never happen...I can tell you're not a biker rtj!
Pat
|
>>So, the silly question is, how much does the panel think it's important to inform the
>>respective insurance companies in that eventuality?
Not a silly question.
If it is material, disclose it.
If it is not material, do not bother to disclose it
If you're not sure, disclose it.
The simplest answer in your case would be to tell the insurer that you constantly swap cars between you and the main user changes every time that you do. They won't care, but you're covered.
|
For them to care one way or the other there would have to be something pretty substantially different in the risk;
one of you with drink driving
one of you with loads of accidents
one of you a racing driver
etc. etc.
|
A family I know have a situation which might have their insurance companies at least "interested". They are a family of four, a married couple and two teenage sons with driving licences.
They have 3 cars. a VW Golf, a Citroen DS3 and a VW Polo. Because the parking arrangements where they live are such that a shuffle would be needed every time someone wanted to go out they have all three cars insured for all four drivers. ( must be fairly expensive to do that but it's their money ) That way, whoever needs a car just takes the one nearest the gate without having to move other cars to use a particular one.
Tough to say who's the main driver on each of those and particulary sensitive given the age of the boys.
|
|
They would almost certainly take the lowest value vehicle and rate that on the boys. And they would take some shifting from that path.
|
|
I'm really not sure how they've done it. I'll ask when I see them.
|
>>
>> So, the silly question is, how much does the panel think it's important to inform
>> the respective insurance companies in that eventuality? It could have in my case become ridiculous
>> in that I might have used hers and vice versa for a month and then
>> switched back.
>>
In our case, our insurer (LV=) said they treated a couple as one entity and it didn't matter who owned the car, who was the RK or who was the main user.
I'm the RK for both our cars and used to be the policyholder for both but at the last renewal switched the car that is nominally wifey's to her as policyholder - she had an incident where her Dad (very old school) insisted that she drive his car and "of course you're covered - it's fully comprehensive" :roll eyes: . She refused and checked the Cert when they got home and she wouldn't have been covered so having her own policy at least gives her the back-stop of DOC cover.
Bizzarely, despite LV= "one entity" comment, the premium went down slightly when switching to her name!
|
>>
>> Bizzarely, despite LV= "one entity" comment, the premium went down slightly when switching to her
>> name!
>>
>>
Sometimes there really is no accounting for the whims of the insurance industry.
We found that it was much cheaper for our daughter (19) to be the main driver on her own policy with us as named drivers than to be a secondary driver with my wife as policyholder and main driver. Same car, same insurance company. Asked on the phone why the premium had halved, they said they didn't know.
|
>> We found that it was much cheaper for our daughter (19) to be the main driver on her own policy with us as named drivers than to be a secondary driver with my wife as policyholder and main driver. Same car, same insurance company. Asked on the phone why the premium had halved, they said they didn't know.
>>
That will probably be because as secondary driver on your wives policy, they would suspect that your daughter would, in fact be the main driver.
Where as, by your daughter taking out her own policy, the true risk is clear.
|
>>
>> That will probably be because as secondary driver on your wives policy, they would suspect
>> that your daughter would, in fact be the main driver.
>> Where as, by your daughter taking out her own policy, the true risk is clear.
>>
But if they (incorrectly, as it happens) assessed the real risks as being the same, why would they charge half-price? Especially now that the riskier driver is even more likely to use the car?
|
>> But if they (incorrectly, as it happens) assessed the real risks as being the same,
>> why would they charge half-price? Especially now that the riskier driver is even more likely
>> to use the car?
>>
Because they can.
I am in a the motortrade.
As a member of the motortrade my (private cars)premium is loaded. - fair enough I could drive other peoples car's on my insurance when working on them.
EXCEPT... I am only insured to drive my car on my policy. NO other cars at all.
So why is my premium loaded?
Because they can.
|
"So why is my premium loaded?
Because they can."
doesn't really hold water as an argument though does it?
They could charge more for any profession if they wanted to. No the reason why the motor trade are charged more is simply that people in that trade ,as a group, statistically have more claims. Tough but true.
|
Do I remember you also saying once that it would have been significantly cheaper to insure your old Volvo 240 estate for your daughter than a modern hatchback?
My son isn't yet 14 but he's already planning his first car ( like you do ) and at the moment he says he wants a beaten up old estate to sling mountain bikes, skis, body/surf boards, wetsuits, mates etc in rather than a hatchback with a boombox.
Of course he may well have a different view in three years time.
|
Apropos of nothing in particular;
Non-disclosure of a material fact is potentially serious.
If one does not disclose a material fact than your insurer may be able to avoid the claim. All the insurer has to do is;
Show the fact
Show that had they known this fact then they would have treated the risk differently.
Then, retrospectively they may apply that difference.
e.g.
If you had a drink driving conviction and they can show that had they known they would have refused the risk, then they may decline the claim.
If, however, they would merely have charged double the premium, then they may now only charge double the premium and then settle the claim.
Unless they can show that the deception was deliberate. Then the world changes, and not in a good way.
However, not all facts are material. Ref; Runfer's comments earlier about how he and his wife share cars.
So, when insuring a car for your children, be very careful about how you decide to deal with main drivers, which care belongs to whom, usage etc. etc.
You can polish the delivery, but do not change or hide the facts. Fast and loose is usually survivable, lying is not.
I would suggest;
Comprehensive cover (its cheaper because it means you care about your car)
Biggest conceivable excess you can imagine (because actually you don't, so get a cheap POS)
Stick his Mother on the policy (It means she cares about the car as well)
Engine size matters.
Old, slow and uncool is cheaper. It means the claims record of the vehicle is better.
Think about his chosen usage and how you explain his occupation.
Being a student is cheaper than working. Working in a bar is a no-no.
Do not buy *anything* that you would actually ever consider claiming for.
If you have a company car and your company will go for it, stick them on the company car insurance ASAP. Invent the reason. Don't let him drive it. But it counts as experience.
Postcode matters.
Mileage matters.
If you pay attention you ought to be able to get down to manageable, albeit still outrageous, figures.
1 yr NCD will make a world of difference. More even more so. Holding him on your own policy can be a false economy.
HOWEVER, if he and a parent are *genuinely* willing to share a car, and to genuinely ensure that he is NOT the main user. That will be the cheapest. You could almost halve the annual cost like that. (you will have to face the ugly truth of his own policy one day.)
If I was in the UK, No. 1 would get a 1000cc, drive a 20 year old, POS and share it with her mother, like it or not.
I, however, would be living in the shed and not getting any food. (or anything else).
Fortunately here one pays for insurance for the car (about £150 p.a.) and then any fool can drive it. And I do.
|
"Non-disclosure of a material fact is potentially serious."
You have to remember though that the law changed last year and centuries old law relating to non-disclosure was abolished for personal insurances (it still applies to commercial insurance). The obligation now is a duty to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation when answering questions posed by an Insurer.
There is no longer any obligation to effectively answer a question that an insurer has not asked.
That is why Insurers proposal forms these days are a lot longer
|
>>You have to remember though that the law changed.....
True. However, people still seem to fall foul when something changes after inception.
|
>> True. However, people still seem to fall foul when something changes after inception.
>>
Not sure why. Their is no obligation to advise an Insurer of any change to the risk after inception or renewal i.e at the time of the creation of the contract UNLESS there is a clause in the policy to that effect.
|
>> Do I remember you also saying once that it would have been significantly cheaper to
>> insure your old Volvo 240 estate for your daughter than a modern hatchback?
>>
Yes, that was true, despite having a 2.3 litre engine compared to a 1.4, (and the ability to seat 6 drunken teenage passengers).
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Wed 20 Nov 13 at 08:34
|
Some numbers to make us weep. Aged 17, my insurance on my first car a Wolseley Hornet was £13 TPFT. That was fairly quickly replaced by an MG Midget which was newer and that cost £47 FC to insure and I still wasn't 18.
Could you imagine trying to get a 17 year old fully comp insurance as the main driver on say, a Mazda MX5 now...
|
|
Clearly I was high risk. I was paying £30 something on a Hillman Imp and later, about 22 I think, £98 on an MG Roadster And I think even that was still TPF&T.
|
Ill say this about Privilege, I have been with them now 9 years and I am yet to find anyone who will quote me cheaper on any car.
Just had my renewal through for the Elantra and they have knocked it down from £36 a month to £30 - I stuck it in the price comparison sites and Privilege come out as the cheapest still. Cant say fairer than that.
They sent through the renewal for the wifes Matrix which went down from £53 a month to £44, again, cheapest anyone will quote her. Good company by any measure.
|
>> Ill say this about Privilege, I have been with them now 9 years and I
>> am yet to find anyone who will quote me cheaper on any car.
>>
I agree. They also gave a full NCD to my wife who had been a named driver, as well as a further 2-car discount.
|
|
Humph, I know a guy who when his sons first learnt to drive he put them on the insurance for his old Defender - apparently was absolutely dirt cheap!
|
Got renewal from More Than, £242.
Got an online quote from Saga - £193
Called More Than and politely offered them the opportunity to rethink.
Came straight back with £169.
Last edited by: smokie on Thu 28 Nov 13 at 15:32
|
Huge difference in Insurance renewal quotes - Robin O'Reliant
