Insurance Companies

[ginkster]

Just renewed with Adrian Flux and price has gone down about £150 from last year. About £50 of that is reducing the annual mileage (6k instead of 10k) and another £60 is their cheaper agreed value cover (£15 instead of £75 last year). I’ve added a couple of mods too - increased max mass and a solar panel. Bizarrely the solar panel made the quote £15 cheaper!

 

[Loustorey]

I just got the best quote for my 2020 cv on here after calling round all day yesterday - using the links in the post above:https://securemotorhomeinsurance.com/comfort/

 

[Bav]

I just got the best quote for my 2020 cv on here after calling round all day yesterday - using the links in the post above:https://securemotorhomeinsurance.com/comfort/

What is it that you think you've linked to? The target site is requesting sign-on details (username & password) and shows nothing useful.

 

[signtoo]

I ended up with Caravan Guard. Howdens wanted a tracker fitted but Caravan Guard were happy with the factory alarm/Immobiliser. I paid £343.

Word of advice, don't bother filling the entire caravan guard form out if you park your vehicle on the street - I went through the whole thing and they could not provide insurance, solely based on that.

I've gone through 3 sites now and they're all quoting £800-1000+, for two divers that have had a license for over 20 years, full NCD and no prior convictions or offences.

It's getting a bit ridiculous when you have maxed out everything you possibly can to aid your insurance and they're trying to charge a grand. What on earth are people having to pay if they have speeding tickets and no NCD?

 

[Bav]

Word of advice, don't bother filling the entire caravan guard form out if you park your vehicle on the street

It's not 100% clear whether you're suggesting not to bother applying at all or to apply but not be truthful (by omission) on your application. I'm hoping it's the former, as the latter would be REALLY poor advice.

 

[signtoo]

It's not 100% clear whether you're suggesting not to bother applying at all or to apply but not be truthful (by omission) on your application. I'm hoping it's the former, as the latter would be REALLY poor advice.

Why would anyone suggest lying on an insurance form? It'll invalidate the whole thing upon an actual claim?

If it helps, I filled out the form truthfully, said I parked it on the road near the house early in the form, filled out the rest, got to the end, and it was at that point they said they were unable to insure.

You'd expect a half decent Web developer to deny you going further, but I suspect it's in their interest to gather data from people completing a full form, even if the application does not meet their criteria.

 

[Bav]

Why would anyone suggest lying on an insurance form? It'll invalidate the whole thing upon an actual claim?

If it helps, I filled out the form truthfully, said I parked it on the road near the house early in the form, filled out the rest, got to the end, and it was at that point they said they were unable to insure.

You'd expect a half decent Web developer to deny you going further, but I suspect it's in their interest to gather data from people completing a full form, even if the application does not meet their criteria.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I'm attempting to justify CG, their website or their operating model. I simply pointed out that your opening comment was ambiguous.

 

[MrGreen]

Just renewed with Adrian Flux and price has gone down about £150 from last year. About £50 of that is reducing the annual mileage (6k instead of 10k) and another £60 is their cheaper agreed value cover (£15 instead of £75 last year). I’ve added a couple of mods too - increased max mass and a solar panel. Bizarrely the solar panel made the quote £15 cheaper!

Adrian Flux quoted me £3,500.

 

[MrGreen]

Word of advice, don't bother filling the entire caravan guard form out if you park your vehicle on the street - I went through the whole thing and they could not provide insurance, solely based on that.

I've gone through 3 sites now and they're all quoting £800-1000+, for two divers that have had a license for over 20 years, full NCD and no prior convictions or offences.

It's getting a bit ridiculous when you have maxed out everything you possibly can to aid your insurance and they're trying to charge a grand. What on earth are people having to pay if they have speeding tickets and no NCD?

Unfortunately it’s a complete scam. I got 12 quotes before I found one remotely reasonable.
It’s an absolute nightmare but all part of the game now.
My quotes ranged from £520 to £3,500.
6k miles, 35 years NCD.
It’s a cartel.

 

[Bav]

My quotes ranged from £520 to £3,500.

It's always been that way. Nobody notices when using comparison websites, because the ridiculous prices appear way down the results list, whereas it's a lot more obvious when have to ring around a bunch of insurers (like you do for campers or heavily modified vans).

It’s a cartel.

If it were a cartel, they all be charging the higher price. The reason for the large discrepancies is that each insurer is aiming to attract a different market segment.

Disclaimer
None of the above is to suggest that the whole of the insurance industry is squeaky-clean and whiter-than-white. There are some aspects of the industry where practices are suspect and require investigation and there are aspects of the industry that are subject to ongoing regulatory scrutiny.

 

[MrGreen]

It's always been that way. Nobody notices when using comparison websites, because the ridiculous prices appear way down the results list, whereas it's a lot more obvious when have to ring around a bunch of insurers (like you do for campers or heavily modified vans).


If it were a cartel, they all be charging the higher price. The reason for the large discrepancies is that each insurer is aiming to attract a different market segment.

Disclaimer
None of the above is to suggest that the whole of the insurance industry is squeaky-clean and whiter-than-white. There are some aspects of the industry where practices are suspect and require investigation and there are aspects of the industry that are subject to ongoing regulatory scrutiny.

You’re making assumptions that aren’t correct.

1. My quotes were not from ringing around.

2. It’s a cartel because they’re all playing the statistics game. They are making it ridiculously hard to shop around knowing that next year most people will just renew when they’ve bumped the price up. If they choose to move, they’ll quote a cheap price next year. The FCA have already called them out on this.

 

[Salty Spuds]

You’re making assumptions that aren’t correct.

1. My quotes were not from ringing around.

2. It’s a cartel because they’re all playing the statistics game. They are making it ridiculously hard to shop around knowing that next year most people will just renew when they’ve bumped the price up. If they choose to move, they’ll quote a cheap price next year. The FCA have already called them out on this.

1, in which case, have you tried ringing round?

2, it isn't a cartel, as @Bav said, if it were, the prices would all be the same, regardless of who you went to. A couple of examples, my 87yr old mother was quoted just over £400 for her motor renewal with her existing insurers, a £50 increase on last year. We shopped around & got quotes ranging from the same as she had been quoted for her renewal, to over £2k, she paid her renewal. Our van insurance has gone up £23 this year from last, we pay just under £400 for a £60k full camper conversion, protected NCB, 10K miles/yr, 180 days EU cover. Our Second car has come down from last year, with the same insurer as the van. The motor insurance market is very competitive & operates on tiny margins, hence anyone with an unknown history is spanked, the insurance companies have to be very selective in who they take on and at what price.

 

[Lubrown]

The motor insurance market is very competitive & operates on tiny margins, hence anyone with an unknown history is spanked, the insurance companies have to be very selective in who they take on and at what price.

They could easily control some of this by not taking BS from repair shops and incident management companies. There are no end of documented cases where repair quotes have been in the thousands while the owner got other quotes for a few hundred once they said they weren’t claiming. Incidents where vehicles are written off as the repair is not cost effective- the owner then buys the car back and has it repaired for a few hundred quid and keeps the change. Service providers forcefully providing hire cars at extortionate rates - some literally came to tens of thousands in the end (just for car hire).
In its entirety- the insurers, repair shops and incident management companies it is not working and ultimately it’s all of these companies that win while we lose out. A little bit of regulation/common sense and decency could see costs and therefore prices plummet.

 

[Bav]

1. My quotes were not from ringing around.

So what? My salient point still stands - it's always been the case that premiums for the same risk attract vastly differing quotations from different insurers and it's got sod all to do with running a cartel.

2. It’s a cartel because they’re all playing the statistics game. They are making it ridiculously hard to shop around knowing that next year most people will just renew when they’ve bumped the price up. If they choose to move, they’ll quote a cheap price next year. The FCA have already called them out on this.

Where do I start?

• Using statistics doesn't equates to running a cartel - using past data to predict future outcomes is an eminently logical and sensible approach to determining premiums. What alternative method would you have them use?
• With the advent of comparison websites, it has never been easier to shop around (and more fool anyone who doesn't)
• The FCA recently (end of Feb) wrote to the HoC Treasury Select Committee stating they were "monitoring motor and home insurance premiums" because they were "concerned about the impact of increasing renewal premium on consumers, during ongoing cost-of-living pressures". No impropriety was alleged nor suggested. In the same letter, the FCA acknowledged that car and home insurance products were "loss-making or only marginally profitable" for many insurer, so if there is a cartel, they ain't very good at it, are they?

I understand (and share) the frustrations regarding insurance premiums, but the reality is that any talk of cartels and a rigged market is based merely on false expectations and a lack of knowledge of the industry.

 

[MrGreen]

So what? My salient point still stands - it's always been the case that premiums for the same risk attract vastly differing quotations from different insurers and it's got sod all to do with running a cartel.


Where do I start?

• Using statistics doesn't equates to running a cartel - using past data to predict future outcomes is an eminently logical and sensible approach to determining premiums. What alternative method would you have them use?
• With the advent of comparison websites, it has never been easier to shop around (and more fool anyone who doesn't)
• The FCA recently (end of Feb) wrote to the HoC Treasury Select Committee stating they were "monitoring motor and home insurance premiums" because they were "concerned about the impact of increasing renewal premium on consumers, during ongoing cost-of-living pressures". No impropriety was alleged nor suggested. In the same letter, the FCA acknowledged that car and home insurance products were "loss-making or only marginally profitable" for many insurer, so if there is a cartel, they ain't very good at it, are they?

I understand (and share) the frustrations regarding insurance premiums, but the reality is that any talk of cartels and a rigged market is based merely on false expectations and a lack of knowledge of the industry.

I completely get what you’re saying but how can a policy that was £534 last year now be £1,150 from the same insurer?

6k miles
35 years protected NCD
Tracker, Alarm, steering lock, CCTV.

This is what the FCA got involved in, different problem to the one you quoted.

Insurers were quoting high renewals (and still are) but customers could get lower quotes from the same insurers by going through their online site.

Let’s not forget that FCA is funded by the insurers so they’re never going to side with motorists.

 

[MrGreen]

1, in which case, have you tried ringing round?

2, it isn't a cartel, as @Bav said, if it were, the prices would all be the same, regardless of who you went to. A couple of examples, my 87yr old mother was quoted just over £400 for her motor renewal with her existing insurers, a £50 increase on last year. We shopped around & got quotes ranging from the same as she had been quoted for her renewal, to over £2k, she paid her renewal. Our van insurance has gone up £23 this year from last, we pay just under £400 for a £60k full camper conversion, protected NCB, 10K miles/yr, 180 days EU cover. Our Second car has come down from last year, with the same insurer as the van. The motor insurance market is very competitive & operates on tiny margins, hence anyone with an unknown history is spanked, the insurance companies have to be very selective in who they take on and at what price.

1. I’d didn’t say I haven’t rung around.

2. The FCA have said they’re not going to investigate the insurers. They funded by the insurers. This is the exact definition of a cartel.
They regulate themselves.

 

[MrGreen]

Read the FCA report.

They clearly state insurers are using underhand tactics:

https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/policy/ps21-5.pdf

 

[Ali-G]

Unfortunately it’s a complete scam. I got 12 quotes before I found one remotely reasonable.
It’s an absolute nightmare but all part of the game now.
My quotes ranged from £520 to £3,500.
6k miles, 35 years NCD.
It’s a cartel.

I quite agree, it's a racket.

 

[Salty Spuds]

They could easily control some of this by not taking BS from repair shops and incident management companies. There are no end of documented cases where repair quotes have been in the thousands while the owner got other quotes for a few hundred once they said they weren’t claiming. Incidents where vehicles are written off as the repair is not cost effective- the owner then buys the car back and has it repaired for a few hundred quid and keeps the change. Service providers forcefully providing hire cars at extortionate rates - some literally came to tens of thousands in the end (just for car hire).
In its entirety- the insurers, repair shops and incident management companies it is not working and ultimately it’s all of these companies that win while we lose out. A little bit of regulation/common sense and decency could see costs and therefore prices plummet.

Absolutely, but ultimately it's us the consumer that are to blame. You have an insignificant bump/scrape and suddenly you have claims management companies ringing you promising the earth, closely followed by the ambulance chasing solicitors offering no win; no fee claims. Here's a true example, our daughters car was parked on their drive & the neighbour reversed into it & made a very minor scuff/dent on the plastic bumper. My daughter offered get a quote for the repair & settle without involving the insurance company, the quote from an independent body repair shop came in at just under £700. The neighbour refused to pay & told my daughter to go through the insurance. It was a relatively new car & still under the manufacturers warranty, so my daughter went to the main dealer & basically said "sort this". A transporter arrived at her house with a brand new courtesy car on it, they took away her car, 3 weeks later it was returned & the loaner was put on the transporter & taken away. In the meantime, she had solicitors ringing her asking her if she wanted to claim for injuries, she explained that she wasn't even in the car when the "accident" happened, no problem say the solicitors, we can claim for stress/loss of amenity etc, she declined. The total bill came to £4.5k, If it had been my car & I had reversed into something, I'd have buffed it out & lived with it.

 

[Bav]

I completely get what you’re saying but how can a policy that was £534 last year now be £1,150 from the same insurer?

Significant increases in the cost of replacement cars
Significant increases in the cost of spare parts
Significant increases in the lead time for spare parts
Significant increases in the daily rate for car hire
Significant increases in the average duration of car hire (driven by the lead time for spare parts)
Significant increases in labour rates for loss adjustors
Significant increases in labour rates for mechanics
Significant increases in labour rates for paint shop operatives
Significant increases in labour rates for vehicle recovery personnel
Significant increases in the insurer's own staffing costs
Significant increases in the cost of personal injury claims
Significant increases in the number of uninsured drivers
Significant increases in the number of fraudulent claims
A statistically meaningful increase in the probability of someone making a claim

All of the above are contributory factors.

Insurers were quoting high renewals (and still are) but customers could get lower quotes from the same insurers by going through their online site.

Yes, the disparity between new business and renewal premium is something the FCA are looking to outlaw, but I suspect an unintended consequence will be to drive up new business premiums rather than drive down renewal premiums.

Let’s not forget that FCA is funded by the insurers so they’re never going to side with motorists.

Sorry, but this is just errant BS.

The FCA is the UK's financial regulatory body and have legal jurisdiction over the activities of the vast majority of the companies operating in the UK financial services market. Whilst it is true that the FCA is funded by charging the companies it regulates, to suggest that those companies are then able to influence FCA decisions is laughable - FS companies pay because not to do so means to ceasing trading in the UK.

Your suggestion that such payments buys them influence is akin to suggesting a TV license fee payer can influence the editorial output of the BBC or that a UK PAYE tax payer can influence UK government policy.