Has anyone any idea how the insurance companies decide on the grouping of a car for insurance purposes. I was always under the impression that there were two main criteria.
1. Performance (hence risk!)
2. The cost of getting a bent one fixed.
Having studied a buyers guide for all UK cars , there are glaring anomalies in this theory. For a range of European cars with tyhe same performance
i.e Top speed 125 , 0-60 10.9 secs, the insurance grouping goes from 9 - 15, an enormous range in terms of insurance cost. Any underwriters care to comment?
|
|
Add to the list the chance of it being misappropriated.
|
|
|
+ claims history of similar cars (if new model, revised periodically if existing model)
+ claims history of likely target audience (big factor)
+ pressure (occasionally very strong) from manufacturers
+ likelihood of theft
Also, car groupings are not totally consistent across insurers, and even where they are, their treating of them is most certainly not consistent.
e.g. from one insurer group 5, 6, 7 could be +20%, +20%, +20% from another insurer could be +20%, +10%, +30%.
Did I mention that only the bottom line matters ?
|
|
|
Yeah,
Spot on Mark, its just the damage to the wallet that matters in the end!
|
|
|
|
I still think if it's a nice motor there's an amenity charge. At worst, if put off, you just have a boring motor instead and no business is lost.
|
|
|
Small front end prang in a Volvo S40/V40 usually means a new front all the way back to the bulkhead. Small front end prang in a Mondeo usually means just the front has to be replaced. Simple things like replacing a welded on towing eye with a screw in towing eye makes a huge difference to 'damageability and repairability', as they call it at Thatcham. Whe Ford revised the Fiesta a few years back with Thatcham's help it made a huge difference in insurance group.
HJ
|
|
|
The annoying thing about groupings is that they also apply when you buy third-party, fire and theft - or just third party insurance. You can insure a large but intrinsically safe old car for third party liability and you will be penalised on the basis that it would have cost a lot to fix had it been new and insured comprehensively.
We used to get caught on this when we insured an old Passat. It was probably less likely to have hurt anyone or to have crashed than a Mini - but we used to get clobbered just because it was in a high grouping.
Insurance is a po-faced racket presided over by a sanctimonious gang of suit-wearing bean counters.
|
There is no penalty. TPF&T premiums do not include any charge based on how much it costs to fix your own car. Taking the example of a Passat vs Mini, the Passat is a heavier and faster car and, if it hits someone or something and the driver is at fault, is likely to result in a higher claim for the insurance company.
Seems reasonable to me that it should cost a lot more to insure a Passat rather than a Mini.
|
As Mark says the bottom line is all that matters.
Just helped a customer move from an Espace Petrol to a Mondeo diesel. The books give the Espace as group 14 and the Mondeo as 7/8.
These folks had suffered a couple of big claims so they were paying £1000 comp for the Espace. When they phoned about the Mondeo they were told it was £120 a year more!
Obviously they told them get stuffed and found insurance through a broker, same cover for £360, a £640 reduction!
David
|
|
|
|
Ian Chandler wrote:
>
> The annoying thing about groupings is that they also apply
> when you buy third-party, fire and theft - or just third
> party insurance.
And how many of the factors listed earlier were related to cost of repair ? How about making TP more expensive, since a less valuable car may be treated and driven with less care than an expensive one ? Would that be fair ?
Tell you what, we could base it on claims experience, how about that ?
>You can insure a large but intrinsically safe old car for third party liability and........
Cars may or may nor be intrinsically safe, but they are not inherently so, neither are their drivers.
> penalised on the basis that it would have cost a lot to fix
> had it been new and insured comprehensively.
>
> We used to get caught on this when we insured an old Passat.
> It was probably less likely to have hurt anyone or to have
> crashed than a Mini - but we used to get clobbered just
> because it was in a high grouping.
> Insurance is a po-faced racket presided over by a sanctimonious gang of suit-wearing bean counters.
Either that, or a bunch of people out to make a profit and increase revenue. And I`m sure you would never consider doing such a thing.
The only issue with Motor Insurance, is that it is compulsory. Now, as far as I know, insurance companies don`t make the law, so it probably isn`t their fault - that would be one of our governments.
With Motor Insurance there are some things to bear in mind....
1) It is a very competitive industry
2) It pays to shop around
3) You, largely, get what you pay for
Or you can indulge in self-insurance - since this means raising a bond, upon which you receive no interest, then that would cost you several thousand a year. But, at least then you wouldn`t have any po-faced or sanctimonious person taking your money, just one losing it.
|
|
|
|
