Scenario:
Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
Front is a mess.

His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
(unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD

Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
message accepting liability.

Opinions?

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:

> Scenario:
> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
> Front is a mess.
>
> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>
> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
> message accepting liability.
>
> Opinions?
>
>

cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?

Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster not a
droid in a call centre. The loss adjuster is the organ grinder that makes a
decision about repair or settlement figure. They are generally realistic
about market value should it be written off. Anyone else in the thrid party
chain between you and the loss adjuster will be motivated by trimming
costs.

On 26/03/2024 12:17, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Scenario:
>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>> Front is a mess.
>>
>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>
>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>> message accepting liability.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>>
>
> cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?

That is what I have been trying to figure out.

Their point (when asked) was that if there were any repair issues then
they could not help.

But they have provisionally said write off any way.
>
> Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster not a
> droid in a call centre. The loss adjuster is the organ grinder that makes a
> decision about repair or settlement figure. They are generally realistic
> about market value should it be written off. Anyone else in the thrid party
> chain between you and the loss adjuster will be motivated by trimming
> costs.

I presume once we get an offer, then we argue with the loss adjuster

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
> Scenario:
> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
> Front is a mess.
>
> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>
> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
> message accepting liability.
>
> Opinions?

My experience with insurance companies in a write off situation,
is that they will invariably make a deliberately low first offer and
hope you just roll over and accept it.

I would gather a few comparable for sale adverts (adjust to include
all options/upgrades/accessories) to use as a rebuttal against their
valuation. You may be surprised at how quickly they accept your
counter offer.

On 26/03/2024 14:44, Mark Olson wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>> Scenario:
>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>> Front is a mess.
>>
>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>
>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>> message accepting liability.
>>
>> Opinions?
>
> My experience with insurance companies in a write off situation,
> is that they will invariably make a deliberately low first offer and
> hope you just roll over and accept it.

Oh, granted, but it is the confusion of which side to deal with.

I'm not 100% sure what Aviva's angle is in this matter.
If it was a TP/FT policy and not FC, then yes I wold expect to deal with
the other party's insurer.

>
> I would gather a few comparable for sale adverts (adjust to include
> all options/upgrades/accessories) to use as a rebuttal against their
> valuation. You may be surprised at how quickly they accept your
> counter offer.

Not many 2005 MG TF/135s sold recently :-)

>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 26/03/2024 12:17, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Scenario:
>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>> Front is a mess.
>>
>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>
>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>> message accepting liability.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>>
>
> cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?
>
> Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster not a

Digging, and someone made this interesting point.
(https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6456493/non-fault-car-accident-claim-through-own-insurance-third-partys-insurance-or-credit-hire-company/p2)

---8<
Remember that you only get ombudsman support if you claim through YOUR
insurance company. Important if you get to the end of the write off
process and they have given a final offer that you are unhappy with.
---8<

> droid in a call centre. The loss adjuster is the organ grinder that makes a
> decision about repair or settlement figure. They are generally realistic
> about market value should it be written off. Anyone else in the thrid party
> chain between you and the loss adjuster will be motivated by trimming
> costs.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utuqml$1t27r$2@dont-email.me:

> On 26/03/2024 12:17, wessie wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Scenario:
>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4
>>> feet. Front is a mess.
>>>
>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>
>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>> message accepting liability.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of
>> bureaucracy?
>>
>> Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster
>> not a
>
> Digging, and someone made this interesting point.
> (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6456493/non-fault-
car-
> accident-claim-through-own-insurance-third-partys-insurance-or-credit-
h > ire-company/p2)
>
> ---8<
> Remember that you only get ombudsman support if you claim through YOUR
> insurance company. Important if you get to the end of the write off
> process and they have given a final offer that you are unhappy with.
> ---8<
>
>> droid in a call centre. The loss adjuster is the organ grinder that
>> makes a decision about repair or settlement figure. They are
>> generally realistic about market value should it be written off.
>> Anyone else in the thrid party chain between you and the loss
>> adjuster will be motivated by trimming costs.
>
>

depends on your feeling about the risk of not reaching an amicable
conclusion balanced against the delay of dealing with an extra layer of
bureaucracy

who is the 3rd party underwriter & broker?

what is the car worth? It's a SOC MG so not a lot I would guess so any
argument over value is likely to be of the "not worth the effort to go
to the ombudsman" level. Although, it's you, so maybe 50p would push you
to seek an interminable argument.

As Mark says, they will want you to settle ASAP rather than pay the loss
adjuster's hourly rate to argue the toss over what is peanuts to them.

Anyway, wait for now until you get a firm decision over repair or total
loss.

On 26/03/2024 15:47, YTC#1 wrote:
> On 26/03/2024 12:17, wessie wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Scenario:
>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>>> Front is a mess.
>>>
>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>
>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>> message accepting liability.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?
>>
>> Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster not a
>
> Digging, and someone made this interesting point.
> (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6456493/non-fault-car-accident-claim-through-own-insurance-third-partys-insurance-or-credit-hire-company/p2)
>
> ---8<
> Remember that you only get ombudsman support if you claim through YOUR
> insurance company.  Important if you get to the end of the write off
> process and they have given a final offer that you are unhappy with.
> ---8<
>

And just had confirmation of the Ombudsman involvement from Aviva.
Also that they believe that the 3rd party will try to do stuff on the cheap.

But the bit I don't like is the if at the end of this statement.
---8<
we are dealing this claim at non-fault we will cover your damage cost
and later on once we have formal acceptance of liability from third
party insurer then we will recover cost of claim from them, if this
claim settle in your favor in future then this claim will not affect
your no claims discount.
---8<
>
>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 26/03/2024 16:41, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utuqml$1t27r$2@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 26/03/2024 12:17, wessie wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utu6ms$1o8s0$1@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> Scenario:
>>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4
>>>> feet. Front is a mess.
>>>>
>>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>>
>>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>>> message accepting liability.
>>>>
>>>> Opinions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> cut out Aviva. Why would you want to add another layer of
>>> bureaucracy?
>>>
>>> Ideally you want to speak directly to the third party loss adjuster
>>> not a
>>
>> Digging, and someone made this interesting point.
>> (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6456493/non-fault-
> car-
>> accident-claim-through-own-insurance-third-partys-insurance-or-credit-
> h
>> ire-company/p2)
>>
>> ---8<
>> Remember that you only get ombudsman support if you claim through YOUR
>> insurance company. Important if you get to the end of the write off
>> process and they have given a final offer that you are unhappy with.
>> ---8<
>>
>>> droid in a call centre. The loss adjuster is the organ grinder that
>>> makes a decision about repair or settlement figure. They are
>>> generally realistic about market value should it be written off.
>>> Anyone else in the thrid party chain between you and the loss
>>> adjuster will be motivated by trimming costs.
>>
>>
>
> depends on your feeling about the risk of not reaching an amicable
> conclusion balanced against the delay of dealing with an extra layer of
> bureaucracy
>
> who is the 3rd party underwriter & broker?

Haven
https://www.haven.gi/

Never heard of them. Not sure about the gi, which is Gibralta

>
> what is the car worth? It's a SOC MG so not a lot I would guess so any
£1000 IMO (cost £1200 last year)

> argument over value is likely to be of the "not worth the effort to go
> to the ombudsman" level. Although, it's you, so maybe 50p would push you
> to seek an interminable argument.
>
> As Mark says, they will want you to settle ASAP rather than pay the loss
> adjuster's hourly rate to argue the toss over what is peanuts to them.
>
> Anyway, wait for now until you get a firm decision over repair or total
> loss.

Yeah, just can't decide who to deal with Aviva or Haven .... I'll let
Jean decide, it is her policy :-)

I think the Gibraltar bit will sway her :-)

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utuv1e$1u8cp$2@dont-email.me:

>
> I think the Gibraltar bit will sway her :-)
>
>

lots of insurance companies (not brokers as they use only one underwriter)
sell policies from parent companies based on Gib. Hastings is the most well
known as well as the various operations by that cunt called Arron Banks.
MCE's Gib underwriter went bust not long ago and then MCE folded last year.

Haven seems to be the underwriter behind two outfits that specialise in
white vans, private hire and taxis. Bottom feeders in other words.

With this in mind, I might change my position and deal with Aviva...

On 26/03/2024 18:21, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:utuv1e$1u8cp$2@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>> I think the Gibraltar bit will sway her :-)
>>
>>
>
> lots of insurance companies (not brokers as they use only one underwriter)
> sell policies from parent companies based on Gib. Hastings is the most well
> known as well as the various operations by that cunt called Arron Banks.
> MCE's Gib underwriter went bust not long ago and then MCE folded last year.
>
> Haven seems to be the underwriter behind two outfits that specialise in
> white vans, private hire and taxis. Bottom feeders in other words.
It was a WVM that did the deed :-)
>
> With this in mind, I might change my position and deal with Aviva...

Just had a long chat with neighbour's (other side) son, who works in
insurance.
In his opinion as I have already got Aviva to agree no excess will be
applied, then to stick with them.

And he said the Insurance business does themselves no favours with stuff
like this :-)

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26/03/2024 14:44, Mark Olson wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Scenario:
>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>>> Front is a mess.
>>>
>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>
>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>> message accepting liability.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>
>> My experience with insurance companies in a write off situation,
>> is that they will invariably make a deliberately low first offer and
>> hope you just roll over and accept it.
>
> Oh, granted, but it is the confusion of which side to deal with.
>
> I'm not 100% sure what Aviva's angle is in this matter.
> If it was a TP/FT policy and not FC, then yes I wold expect to deal with
> the other party's insurer.
>
>>
>> I would gather a few comparable for sale adverts (adjust to include
>> all options/upgrades/accessories) to use as a rebuttal against their
>> valuation. You may be surprised at how quickly they accept your
>> counter offer.
>
> Not many 2005 MG TF/135s sold recently :-)

If you only paid ~ 1000 GBP for it (per what I saw in another reply),
I'm guessing you won't see much resistance to a fair payout, it's
not worth the adjuster's time to argue the toss.

Mark Olson wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 26/03/2024 14:44, Mark Olson wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Scenario:
>>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>>>> Front is a mess.
>>>>
>>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>>
>>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>>> message accepting liability.
>>>>
>>>> Opinions?
>>> My experience with insurance companies in a write off situation,
>>> is that they will invariably make a deliberately low first offer and
>>> hope you just roll over and accept it.
>> Oh, granted, but it is the confusion of which side to deal with.
>>
>> I'm not 100% sure what Aviva's angle is in this matter.
>> If it was a TP/FT policy and not FC, then yes I wold expect to deal with
>> the other party's insurer.
>>
>>> I would gather a few comparable for sale adverts (adjust to include
>>> all options/upgrades/accessories) to use as a rebuttal against their
>>> valuation. You may be surprised at how quickly they accept your
>>> counter offer.
>> Not many 2005 MG TF/135s sold recently :-)
>
> If you only paid ~ 1000 GBP for it (per what I saw in another reply),
> I'm guessing you won't see much resistance to a fair payout, it's
> not worth the adjuster's time to argue the toss.

My car was written-off in October last year - somebody emerged from a
side road and drove into the side of me as I passed.

With a fully comp policy, I claimed though my insurer (esure), via their
website. They immediately offered a ridiculously low amount, via their
automated system; I rejected this and submitted my valuation.

An accident management company phoned me, offering a courtesy car etc.
When asked, they said this would not be on a credit-hire contract.
I didn't need a courtesy car and declined, so never saw anything in
writing from them.

A short time later esure phoned me and agreed that the car was worth
what I valued it at (£6500); They paid me this amount, with no excess
deduction, and collected my car. About six weeks later, they emailed to
say they had recovered their costs from the other party's insurance and
that my NCD would not be affected.

Advice from Andrew Dalton (of White Dalton motorcycle specialist
insurers), see link, is to always claim on your own fully-comp policy
and let them and the other party's insurer sort it out between them.

https://www.whitedalton.co.uk/motorbike-blog/2019/01/the-fully-comp-minefield/

On 27/03/2024 10:33, Sqirrel99 wrote:
> Mark Olson wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 26/03/2024 14:44, Mark Olson wrote:
>>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Scenario:
>>>>> Neighbour manages to reverse his van the MG and shove it back 4 feet.
>>>>> Front is a mess.
>>>>>
>>>>> His insco has admitted liability and wants to handle the repairs
>>>>> (unlikely to be repairable). They say less hassle over the NCD
>>>>>
>>>>> Our insco (Aviva) says to deal with them. NCD not affected as have
>>>>> message accepting liability.
>>>>>
>>>>> Opinions?
>>>> My experience with insurance companies in a write off situation,
>>>> is that they will invariably make a deliberately low first offer and
>>>> hope you just roll over and accept it.
>>> Oh, granted, but it is the confusion of which side to deal with.
>>>
>>> I'm not 100% sure what Aviva's angle is in this matter.
>>> If it was a TP/FT policy and not FC, then yes I wold expect to deal
>>> with the other party's insurer.
>>>
>>>> I would gather a few comparable for sale adverts (adjust to include
>>>> all options/upgrades/accessories) to use as a rebuttal against their
>>>> valuation. You may be surprised at how quickly they accept your
>>>> counter offer.
>>> Not many 2005 MG TF/135s sold recently :-)
>>
>> If you only paid ~ 1000 GBP for it (per what I saw in another reply),
>> I'm guessing you won't see much resistance to a fair payout, it's
>> not worth the adjuster's time to argue the toss.
>
> My car was written-off in October last year - somebody emerged from a
> side road and drove into the side of me as I passed.
>
> With a fully comp policy, I claimed though my insurer (esure), via their
> website. They immediately offered a ridiculously low amount, via their
> automated system; I rejected this and submitted my valuation.
>
> An accident management company phoned me, offering a courtesy car etc.
> When asked, they said this would not be on a credit-hire contract.
> I didn't need a courtesy car and declined, so never saw anything in
> writing from them.
>
> A short time later esure phoned me and agreed that the car was worth
> what I valued it at (£6500); They paid me this amount, with no excess
> deduction, and collected my car. About six weeks later, they emailed to
> say they had recovered their costs from the other party's insurance and
> that my NCD would not be affected.
>

This tale gives me great confidence, thanks :-)

> Advice from Andrew Dalton (of White Dalton motorcycle specialist
> insurers), see link, is to always claim on your own fully-comp policy
> and let them and the other party's insurer sort it out between them.

Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my own
insco, they still tried to get me to use them.

Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience just
mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it regardless.

>
> https://www.whitedalton.co.uk/motorbike-blog/2019/01/the-fully-comp-minefield/

Good link, sort of sums up the call I just had with Adrian Flux (getting
a quote on a camper van).

This has foobared Jean currenlty owning it or being on the policy.
"Until it is all sorted out between the insurers you have no NCB."

With Jean I was quoted £2500, so in a complete opposite of the norm, it
is cheaper to remove someone rather than add them.

Just me, £700

>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 wrote:
> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my own
> insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>
> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience just
> mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it regardless.

Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new policy,
I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.

Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
number of cases) without any claim being involved.

> This has foobared Jean currenlty owning it or being on the policy.
> "Until it is all sorted out between the insurers you have no NCB."

This could make things expensive if you needed a replacement car prior
to having your NCD restored; Luckily I could take my time sourcing a
replacement.

> With Jean I was quoted £2500, so in a complete opposite of the norm, it
> is cheaper to remove someone rather than add them.
> Just me, £700

Ouch.

On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
> YTC#1 wrote:
>> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my own
>> insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>>
>> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
>> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience
>> just mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it regardless.
>
> Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new policy,
> I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.
>
> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
> spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
> number of cases) without any claim being involved.

Yeah, we had a good hunt at the last renewal over the 2 cars

>
>> This has foobared Jean currenlty owning it or being on the policy.
>> "Until it is all sorted out between the insurers you have no NCB."
>
> This could make things expensive if you needed a replacement car prior
> to having your NCD restored; Luckily I could take my time sourcing a
> replacement.

Bad timing with finally spotting a camper van ....
>
>> With Jean I was quoted £2500, so in a complete opposite of the norm,
>> it is cheaper to remove someone rather than add them.
>> Just me, £700
>
> Ouch.
>

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
>
> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
> spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
> number of cases) without any claim being involved.

The inscos excuse is that modern cars have a shed load of electronics
and are expensive and difficult for mechanics to repair. Parts are
harder to come by and more expensive. Also the keyless entry systems
used on some cars is insecure unless the owner takes special care (which
negates the whole point of the keyless system) and thefts have gone up.
Also roads are more crowded and people are much more likely to be
distracted by things like mobile phones.

Much of which I suspect is true.

However, a sudden steep increase: you'd think this had been happening
over a period of time - it's not as though cars suddenly got ABS, ESC,
electronic lane assist and traction control in the last couple of years,
and drivers have only just started using mobile phones.

Apparently, the situation is not so bad on the Continent.

--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 27/03/2024 22:09, PipL wrote:
> On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
> >
> > Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
> > significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
> > spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
> > number of cases) without any claim being involved.
>
<snip>

>
> Much of which I suspect is true.
>
> However, a sudden steep increase: you'd think this had been happening
> over a period of time - it's not as though cars suddenly got ABS, ESC,
> electronic lane assist and traction control in the last couple of years,
> and drivers have only just started using mobile phones.
>
> Apparently, the situation is not so bad on the Continent.
>

Bloody Brexit!

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
> YTC#1 wrote:
>> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my own
>> insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>>
>> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
>> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience
>> just mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it regardless.
>
> Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new policy,
> I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.
>
> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
> spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
> number of cases) without any claim being involved.

Curious that my car insurance has gone down a couple of pounds for each
of the last two years and bike insurance has barely budged either.
Nothing has changed in terms of drivers or NCB etc

Chris
--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550T
https://www.Deuchars.org.uk

"chrisnd @ukrm" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
news:l6lfg1Fo8pmU1@mid.individual.net:

> On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my
>>> own insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>>>
>>> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
>>> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience
>>> just mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it
>>> regardless.
>>
>> Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new
>> policy, I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.
>>
>> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
>> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people
>> I've spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50%
>> in a number of cases) without any claim being involved.
>
> Curious that my car insurance has gone down a couple of pounds for
> each of the last two years and bike insurance has barely budged
> either. Nothing has changed in terms of drivers or NCB etc
>
> Chris

age?

my premiums slowly dropped as I approached 60 and have now plateaued. I
believe they will begin to rise from 70.

On 28/03/2024 16:16, wessie wrote:
>"chrisnd @ukrm" <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote in
>news:l6lfg1Fo8pmU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
>>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>>> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my
>>>> own insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>>>>
>>>> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
>>>> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience
>>>> just mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it
>>>> regardless.
>>>
>>> Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new
>>> policy, I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.
>>>
>>> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
>>> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people
>>> I've spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50%
>>> in a number of cases) without any claim being involved.
>>
>> Curious that my car insurance has gone down a couple of pounds for
>> each of the last two years and bike insurance has barely budged
>> either. Nothing has changed in terms of drivers or NCB etc
>>
>> Chris
>
>age?
>
>my premiums slowly dropped as I approached 60 and have now plateaued. I
>believe they will begin to rise from 70.

No, I've passed that, and a bit :-)
Fingers crossed for next year. Maybe they'll do a whole load of additions
to try and frighten me off the road?

Chris

On 28/03/2024 15:08, chrisnd @ukrm wrote:
> On 27/03/2024 12:34, Sqirrel99 wrote:
>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>> Talking to the 3rd party insco today, to tell them I was using my own
>>> insco, they still tried to get me to use them.
>>>
>>> Their final argument was that using own insco means there will be a
>>> claim recorded etc etc and would affect renewal. From my experience
>>> just mentioning an accident (even non fault like this) ups it
>>> regardless.
>>
>> Given that you have to declare the claim when taking out a new policy,
>> I don't think it matters where the claim is recorded.
>>
>> Insuring my replacement car (same make, model and age) cost
>> significantly more than the previous policy, but then many people I've
>> spoken to have complained about insurance costs going up (by 50% in a
>> number of cases) without any claim being involved.
>
> Curious that my car insurance has gone down a couple of pounds for each
> of the last two years and bike insurance has barely budged either.
> Nothing has changed in terms of drivers or NCB etc
>
(potentially) adding a campervan to my current policy makes the car
portion cheaper.

(We are getting around the current insurance issue by using Jean's bike
policy for her NCB)

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 28/03/2024 06:09 PipL penned these words:
> The inscos excuse is that modern cars have a shed load of electronics
> and are expensive and difficult for mechanics to repair. Parts are
> harder to come by and more expensive. Also the keyless entry systems
> used on some cars is insecure unless the owner takes special care (which
> negates the whole point of the keyless system

Must be why they charging me a grand for a SOC[1] which has zero modern
conveniences.

[1] 2007 Fiesta
--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

On 29/03/2024 11:16, Boots wrote:
> On 28/03/2024 06:09 PipL penned these words:
>> The inscos excuse is that modern cars have a shed load of electronics
>> and are expensive and difficult for mechanics to repair. Parts are
>> harder to come by and more expensive. Also the keyless entry systems
>> used on some cars is insecure unless the owner takes special care (which
>> negates the whole point of the keyless system
>
> Must be why they charging me a grand for a SOC[1] which has zero modern
> conveniences.
>
> [1] 2007 Fiesta

Yes, but the car you might run into, and thus would be the claimed cost,
could well have all of these.

--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 29/03/2024 21:15, PipL wrote:
> On 29/03/2024 11:16, Boots wrote:
>> On 28/03/2024 06:09 PipL penned these words:
>>> The inscos excuse is that modern cars have a shed load of electronics
>>> and are expensive and difficult for mechanics to repair. Parts are
>>> harder to come by and more expensive. Also the keyless entry systems
>>> used on some cars is insecure unless the owner takes special care (which
>>> negates the whole point of the keyless system
>>
>> Must be why they charging me a grand for a SOC[1] which has zero modern
>> conveniences.
>>
>> [1] 2007 Fiesta
>
> Yes, but the car you might run into, and thus would be the claimed cost,
> could well have all of these.
>

or he is an old cunt with a shite record.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/