|
Is it possible to say what proportion of the average insurance premium relates to the car's value and if so, how much roughly is it? What are the the most important variables in the equation used to calculate our premiums? I'd expect age/ experience/claims record to be at the top of the list.
|
|
I'd say it probably is possible to say but that the average is a fairly meaningless figure. What it would be, I have no idea.
|
Very little of the cars value has much to do with the premium.
Some fairly expensive autos have suprisingly low premiums
The main variables are the car type and the driver.
The car type variables are, how much does it cost to repair, what kind of driver does it attract (mad, bad, high risk drivers and joyriders) and of course any previous data experience of that car.
MOst of the risk and hence cost is based on driver profile.
|
RF
The difference between fully comprehensive and TPF&T premiums are very small now. This suggests that the the element for the insured car is very small.
In fact there was a thread a while ago where several people had a higher quote for TPF&T than fully comp from the same company at the same time.
I don't understand why and IIRC our insurance guru Mark(RBLS) in his Mark(Brazil) days was surprised that this was the situation.
C
|
|
I can't understand the rationale. My Omega was only worth £2,000, and my new Honda cost me just over £23,000, but the insurance was only an extra £35.
|
|
No-one can say what you're going to hit and how much damage will be caused, so I would guess what you're driving is not that large a part of the equation.
|
|
I'd say the performance of the car had a much greater effect than the value. Webbing around, mine was the same for TPF&F and Fully comp.
|
|
Historically the risk was the damage you might do to another car, and if comprehensively insured your own. Now, the big ticket is personal injury.
|
|
|
|
It seems clear to me that the replacement value of one's car is almost irrelevant, as the premium doesn't vary (as far as I can tell) as the car ages and depreciates. They do ask you its value, and presumably they will pay out no more than that, if it happens to be less than the book market value.
|
|
|
|
|
The reason TPFT has caught up and become even more expensive is that it contains a lot more cover than it used. There is also the feeling that TPFT is traditionally bought by those with a higher than average crash risk eg new drivers in bangers, drivers with dubious accident history that don't have deep pockets etc
I am sure I heard a rumour that TPFT could be phased out altogether and that all insurance would have to be comprehensive. I am sure there has been some discussion as to whether the gender bias in motor insurance is now made illegal by one of the new EU equality regulations but I haven't found any newspaper reports on this either.
teabelly
|
As a person very ignorant on the subject i would have thought the major component of any insurance is the "third party" bit and not the value of the (first party's?)car itself. To some extent this must include an assessment of what damage any car is likely to do to a third party. Presumably they think that someone (youth)in a modified Cosworth is more likely to be blasting around (showing off??) than some 50 year old (female?)in a Civic and therefore inflict damage on a third party. Whether the Cossy or the Civic is damaged is a minor matter compared to death or serious injury of a third party.
What does it say that my brand new Berlingo cost less to insure (fully comp) than my 12 yr old BX? (Don't go there!)
|
|
|
I understand that it is unlawful for insurers to discriminate on the basis of medical history, but age and sex are fair game.
So, if you have recently had your licence back after being medically unfit to drive (stroke etc), althought the insurers need to know about medical conditions, they cannot increase the premium for it, or refuse to insure you on those grounds.
I would agree that it seems that the value of the vehicle has little bearing on the premium. This is further demonstrated by my van insurance.
Even for private use I was paying more for TPFT on the van (2.1L diesel bought for £750) than I was for a Xantia 2.0L Petrol that was arguabley worth twice as much fully comp.
H
|
Interesting point there and perhaps the vehicle does count for more than I assumed especially if it's a commercial.
Why do they seem to have such a downer on vans, whether for private or commercial - the latter if you can get insurance at all.
Accidents I have seen don't seem to include large numbers of vans, quite the reverse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
