Reply With QuoteNew cars have better safety features. This is appealing to insurers. Look at the difference in insurance band for a golf, and a newer one with the radar cruise control, lane assist etc. Not all about the value of the car.
Following a £190 pa increase in my car insurance when I moved to a London borough recently I was dreading the call to LV this morning to change my policy over to a new car. I expected a massive increase moving from a 20 year old 'banger' to a 3 year old hatchback,
Old car - Honda Accord V6 Coupe 3 litre - worth less than 1K
New car - Toyota Arus 1.6 litre - worth 9K
This resulted in a £30 pa reduction!
I dont understand this - surely the insurance company are carrying a far greater degree of risk with the new car.
What am I missing?
New cars have better safety features. This is appealing to insurers. Look at the difference in insurance band for a golf, and a newer one with the radar cruise control, lane assist etc. Not all about the value of the car.
Insurance is worked out on likely hood of a claim / cost of a claim.
It's got little to do with what your car is worth, more how likely it is to be nicked or how likely you, as the owner, are to plough into a bus stop.
The insurance is more about you, than about the car.
One is a 3-litre V6 coupe, tear it up to Maccy D's, boy racer special
The other is a 1.6-litre, Mr Sensible pootling about town, with no chance of ever getting nicked or noticed.
I exaggerate, but you see my point
The value of your car is only a very small part of how your premium is calculated.
Where you park your car (garaging is more expensive than driveway, mainly due to the risk of scraping it whilst getting in or out of the garage), what accident blackspots are around you plus, quite frankly, a thousand other things.
But more relevant to your question, as you haven't moved... it'll be due to claims experience with other owners of your old car against those of your new. This is why if you buy a newly released car sometimes the policies are quite cheap but have a large movement the year after.
As I said at the top, the value of your car is immaterial compared to the cost of the damage it can inflict. The cost of medical care for an individual, or even an entire family, for life run unsurprisingly into the millions.
Never thought about the fact they compare you against the same car but different drivers... It makes sense tho, common factor.Originally Posted by Miocene
Interesting...I pay what I consider a reasonable amount, but still over £1500
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
I nearly fell over this year, two cars on an Aviva multicar, both self employed so busines use, protected ncd, all usual stuff. I have points and other is DVLA aware, so not perfect but...
£255! BOTH cars! That must be as cheap as it gets!
As has been mentioned there are a lot of factors which affect the premium, it is not only your car, but they factor in what you might hit and the likely claim.
Also the garaging thing, if there was a car electrical problem which caused a fire and the garage burnt down, would be against the car insurance and not the house insurance.
It can also be cheaper to park on the street rather than on the drive as thieves are less likely to know which house the keys are in!
Thanks for the replies.
It now starts to make sense!
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
My experience with Aviva two cars ,social and domestic only ,no points on either licence ,no accidents ,no DVLA health additions renewal up by 9% told them to do one and shaved off £250.00 with Saga.
Velour, I suspect you’ll tire of the Arus quite quickly
Are you keeping the Honda just in case?
Car insurance seems to defy all logic.
This year I had a renewal on my Golf R (it was switched to for about £120 last summer), so I expected something in the £250-300 range. Nothing had changed except the car.
Renewal quote (can't recall the company, but year on year renewals for the RX8 had been pretty fair in previous years) was £705!
Needless to say I checked on The Meerkats to see if I'd burdened myself with an insurance nightmare - Upshot was I paid £230ish.
Incumbent did offer to drop to somewhere in the £400s, needless to say, I moved...
Just seems insane - It costs more to acquire a new customer than retain one, so why encourage people to move all the time?
M
Last edited by snowman; 26th February 2018 at 17:43.
It's hard not to be jaded by car insurance logic, to be honest. I've insured my share of cars (I change cars pretty much every year and have done for the last 15 or so years).
I went from a Fiesta ST - the current gen, which are being stolen EVERYWHERE, pack around 200BHP, are apparently easier to steal than an unlocked bicycle, and regularly getting smashed up by hooligans - to a dirty old 5 series diesel which actually is less powerful than the Fiesta, and about as desirable to the average car thief as a kick in the balls - yet somehow my insurance went up by about 40%.
I can understand some arguments - improvements in safety perhaps. Cost of repairs. Except in the case of an old 5 series worth a grand, all they'll do in the event of any accident is write it off whereas the Fiesta would potentially have swallowed up thousands of pounds of repairs before being considered for a write off.
The whole system is baffling to me.
Car ins. is completely baffling! I insured my Honda 1.8S 2 years ago with LV cost £256... last year their quote was £263. I went on a comparison site, filled all my details in and the cheapest was LV again at £243. Rang LV, told them it was cheaper than their quote so they matched it
Mobile contracts, broadband contracts, Sky / Virgin contracts... it's all the same nonsensical approach.
Customers become profitable on renewal when it comes to insurance, I presume similar when it comes to mobile / broadband etc (or at least when your initial deal ends).
Posting Permissions
