OT: Car Insurance

Following on from the thread last month, my renewal has come through, multicar policy, 2 cars, both of us as named drivers on each car, one as the main driver, business use for all named drivers, comprehensive cover, courtsey car.
Avia want £700, wander off to Compare the Meerkat, Admiral £350 for as far as I can tell so far the same sort of policy and level of cover! Plenty of other non-major name insureres at similar price levels so Admiral are not and "outlier".
Called Aviva, they can't match it. So what are Admiral like? They are a name I've seen about for a good few years. TBH we aren't likely to need their services, not being accident prone.
--
Cheers
Dave.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday 07 November 2013 10:59 Dave Liquorice wrote in uk.d-i-y:

I would have no issues with them. I am with Liverpool Victoria and they answer their phones quickly (my first test for potential uselessness) so no issues there...
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Was that your first year with them?
IME they have a secretive clawback policy on the second year, put your details into a comparison site with DoB(s) same as your policy and you will get an inflated price. Enter your DoB(s) only one day different so that you're not a database match you get the real quote, in my case 20% cheaper.
It's a trick I expect them to play and so always get a price on false details first but this was the most sneaky bit of price fixing I have come across.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/2013 10:59, Dave Liquorice wrote:

They are fine, but will try to screw you at renewal.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:33:04 +0000, Chris Bartram wrote:

are

to

You mean like Aviva are trying to do, shoving it up £154 not including the £67 "discount" for multicar...
This renewal is the first renewal of this multicar policy but I'd previously had both cars seperately with Aviva for a number of years and the renewals on those had all been competative. I almost just renewed but though I'd do a quick check first, almost fell of me chair with many companies offering around 50% less than Aviva are asking...
I'm aware of the sneaky tricks they all pull with website quotes, went through that one a year or so back. WTF they can't just give sensible and competative renewal quotes? Over all I guess we'd all end up paying £50 more but I've already spent a few hours faffing about, getting the quote, checking the level of cover etc. I'll jump through the hoops changing insurers for £350 but an "in line with inflation" sort of rise that was ball park with others I'd just renew.
--
Cheers
Dave.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/2013 20:38, Dave Liquorice wrote:

I'm not so sure that we *would* pay more if companies rewarded loyalty rather than disloyalty, like they had used to do.
The current setup has spawned a whole industry of meercats, etc. who are getting paid part of our premiums, but who otherwise wouldn't exist.
--
Cheers,
Roger
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Overall car insurance premiums have fallen this year as a result of clamp down on fraudulent claims.
--
bert

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/2013 10:59, Dave Liquorice wrote:

We've had both our car insured on an Admiral multi-car policy for several years, and they're ok. I've had a couple of claims - one which was my fault, and one which wasn't - and they dealt with both ok, in the second case providing me with a decent hire car whilst mine was being repaired (at the expense of the third party's insurers!).
Like all insurers, they're probably quoting you a loss-leader price to get your business, and the renewal premium will be a lot higher. My renewal premium actually came *down* this - and that's not due to a higher NCD - I've been on max (guaranteed) for years. It may be due to the fact that the industry is at last getting a grip of fraudulent whiplash claims. Anyway, I still decided to get some competitive quotes and found that I could get the same cover from LV for quite a lot less. When I confronted Admiral with this, they suddenly found some hidden discounts which they could apply! They didn't quite match LV, but it was close enough to be not worth the hassle of switching.
In summary, Admiral are fine, but you have to threaten to leave each year in order to keep the price down. I guess they all reward disloyalty in the same way - which I find rather sad.
--
Cheers,
Roger
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/13 10:59, Dave Liquorice wrote:

One thing to be aware of with Admiral is that they supposedly charge higher premiums if you attend a speed awareness course, i.e. they treat it the same as an actual speeding conviction. It was all over the news last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20328860
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 15:43:15 +0000, ja wrote:

I can see Admirals side, you *have* been caught speeding so I suspect their risk stats are correct, seems only fair for the riskier drivers to pay more.
The Police saying that attendance on the course won't affect premiums is verging on misselling. Without agreement from all insurers that attending the SA course won't affect premiums the Police can't possibly state that it won't. Are there weasel words in what the Police say...
"With no incentive to avoid increased insurance premiums, police fear drivers may opt to pay a fine instead and reject the courses."
Why does people rejecting the course and paying the fine bother the Police, unless of course it hits their income...
--
Cheers
Dave.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/2013 20:24, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Which it does. Fines can no longer be used to fund speed cameras whereas the profits from courses can.
Another Dave
--
Change nospam to gmx

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/11/2013 20:24, Dave Liquorice wrote:

But the operative word here is "caught"! There can be few people who don't exceed the speed limit at times even if they don't do it routinely. How does someone who has been caught speeding constitute a higher risk than someone who has broken the speed limit *without* being caught?
--
Cheers,
Roger
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 22:01:03 +0000, Roger Mills wrote:

My cynical view is that if you are alert and savvy enough not to get caught then you are less likely to be caught unaware by other traffic hazards.
Being caught by a speed camera suggests that you were both breaking the speed limit and not paying close attention to the road.
Cheers
Dave R
P.S. - a bit like asking "Why do only criminals who are caught have a criminal record?"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 08/11/2013 11:46, David.WE.Roberts wrote:
8<

In other words they were driving too fast for their abilities.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Maybe because they believe the courses have some success in changing driver behaviour?
--
bert

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, November 7, 2013 10:59:41 AM UTC, Dave Liquorice wrote:

I was with them for many years on their bonus accelerator policy and had no problems. Had a couple of claims which were settled without excessive hass le. They offered me a very low value for a car I wrote off, but a bit of ha ggling got that up to something a little less ridiculous.
Philip
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 20:24:29 +0000, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Apart from the Police not receiving the fine (or course) income, it's because the courses are viewed to improve driving standards. And who could possibly object to that aim?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Following on from the thread last month, my renewal has come through, multicar policy, 2 cars, both of us as named drivers on each car, one as the main driver, business use for all named drivers, comprehensive cover, courtsey car.
Avia want 700, wander off to Compare the Meerkat, Admiral 350 for as far as I can tell so far the same sort of policy and level of cover! Plenty of other non-major name insureres at similar price levels so Admiral are not and "outlier".
Called Aviva, they can't match it. So what are Admiral like? They are a name I've seen about for a good few years. TBH we aren't likely to need their services, not being accident prone.
RAIS is pretty good for over fifties. A truck collided with my car when it was parked. They were very efficient dealing with the matter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.