Chris Knott

[NikB]

Hi
The issue brought up about the year's experience of driving a similar performance car is due unfortunately to the high claims loss ratio's on this type of 'risk profile'.

Only last Thursday, the insurers visited us and said that Z4's are one of the cars which don't preform very well in terms of accidents had, so they give us criteria where they know that they aren't going to get stung everytime.

We would love to help everyone regardless of experience but the from their own experience, the only people who make them money are the ones who fit the criteria.

Saying that, we are more than pleased at the amount of people insuring with us on here which shows the scheme is worthwhile for the majority.

But you don't seem to take individuals into account. This thread has shown examples where someone who has own a rwd car for over a year may have less experience than myself. I think it's the blanket approach that is wrong and is something I'd expect from a large company not a smaller brokers where we have sought out that specialist product. You can't tell me that with all my driving experience I am a higher risk than someone who owns a basic 1 series to commute then buys a Z4 coupe?

[Darkman]

Never ever been asked about driving experience other than how many years I have held a full UK licence, ended up with Endsleigh this year. Thought the premium was a bit steep but the looked at the fact it £18K car and a roadster which generally are more expensive to insure plus a Liverpool address. I have it all against me here so £724 fully comp and protected probably isn't to bad

[Mr Whippy]

I took out a new annual policy with Chris Knott last week on my Golf and told them that some rear wheel drive experience may be required. I thought fair enough I can provide some evidence of that.

I have since joined this forum and realised that what they consider some experience is in fact 1 year's ownership of a rwd car. So this afternoon I contacted them regarding this and explained that I have been an IAM driver for 8 years, have been taught over years by my father who is a former police class 1 advanced driver, done a skid pan day with fwd, rwd, awd, attended a bmw car handling day on which my father was an instructor (and got the best time on the obstacle course ), done a track day in a Ferrari, rally day in mk2 Escort, and owned a 190bhp Golf (that also had NOS for a while) for the last 7.5years.

This is still not deemed enough driving experience yet someone who may have only driven a basic low powered rwd bmw could get insured - doesn't make sense to me.

So I've said that given I'm still in the cooling off period I may look elsewhere as I don't want to go and buy a car that I either can't get insurance on or will get stiffed for! When I mentioned this they got quite shirty with me.

It is a bit stupid, but that is their criteria.

Because they wouldn't insure me either with a rather colourful array of awd/rwd/fwd cars over the years (mainly younger when I drove parents cars), I won't use them now I 'qualify'... I just don't think that they should be rewarded for being so ignorant, but that is my view.

In fact, from my annoyance with them, having now had a lovely safe first year in my Z4, which is possibly one of the safest feeling cars I've ever owned (go figure), I won't EVER use them on principle now.

Dave

So Dave, let me ask you this. If I gave you £100 but then you knew you would have to pay me £147 within the next 12 months and therefore make a loss of £47, would you agree to it? And would you do it for say 100 other people as well? Or would you say no but accept £100 from say 3000 people knowing you'd only have to pay £50 back to them on average so you make £150,000 in that year?

Your comments about not using us on principle now you qualify are, and nothing personal, a little immature though if YOU were the person paying out the money, i think you'd use wisdom and logic and understand why in business, decisions have to be made.

If an insurer black lists you based on statistics at one point, and then when you prove statistically favourable you choose to black list them for not taking a risk on you, then I don't think that is immature.

I think that is simply me exercising inverse loyalty. If you won't take a risk on me when it suits me, then I won't take a risk on you when it suits you!


I totally agree it's simply the stats, as I mentioned in my first post, and that is fine... but I won't reward a company with my custom that refuses me service when I don't look a good bet.

Think of it like the shopping scene in Pretty Woman, where she gets turned away when she doesn't look a good bet by the shop owners, then goes and tells them it's their loss when she is taken out by her loaded pimpy pervert
The shop owners don't really have a leg to stand on saying it's immature. It was their choice to refuse business, no one elses. Why should a refusal to provide service be rewarded by asking for it later when you are clearly a good customer to them?

Dave

[mikedav]

But you don't seem to take individuals into account. This thread has shown examples where someone who has own a rwd car for over a year may have less experience than myself.

I think the problem for insurers is that they have to stereotype, otherwise there are too many variables. For example regardless of my driving history, half the insurers I contacted wouldn't touch me on an M3 because I was under 25. Even if you live in a gated compound, insuring a car in a Lambeth postcode is going to cost a fortune - they cannot know the exact specifics of your property. It sucks, but that's insurance! I agree this RWD one is a little generalised, but can see where it has come from.

Tim, I actually need to renew my cover in a few days so i shall get a quote

[PawnSacrifice]

Wise words, mikedav! Insurance is one of life's penalties - although we're all glad we have it if all goes wrong... and then you're glad you paid a little extra for a company that honors its policies and pays up! Agree with MrWhippy's point too, I've ruled out companies that haven't been there for me when things weren't so good.

Tim, I actually need to renew my cover in a few days so i shall get a quote

They don't like Ms if IIRC

[ChrisKnottIns]

But you don't seem to take individuals into account. This thread has shown examples where someone who has own a rwd car for over a year may have less experience than myself.

I think the problem for insurers is that they have to stereotype, otherwise there are too many variables. For example regardless of my driving history, half the insurers I contacted wouldn't touch me on an M3 because I was under 25. Even if you live in a gated compound, insuring a car in a Lambeth postcode is going to cost a fortune - they cannot know the exact specifics of your property. It sucks, but that's insurance! I agree this RWD one is a little generalised, but can see where it has come from.

Tim, I actually need to renew my cover in a few days so i shall get a quote

Spot on mikedav!
Insurers make their decisions on years of experience and actuaries working constantly on stats. They have concluded that those without experience are more likely to have a claim than those who have had experience.

Please don't shoot the messenger everyone but I can see both sides.

[pvr]

Those same stats that state :

- that if you have a claim, you are more likely to get another one (even if your car was parked and a tree fell on it).
- that if you have a speeding ticket, you are a higher risk.

And now the latest that if you are born abroad, even if you arrive in the UK as a baby, you are a higher risk and attract up to 30% premium loading.

[mikedav]

Agree with your point PVR

Personally... I understand why they make assumptions and set criteria, but definitely don't agree with all of them...

Like the one stating you have to tell them if you have an accident, but don't claim. IMO, if I choose to reverse through my garage door every morning and ram parked cars on a daily basis, it's none of their business as long as I am not making any claims and should have no impact on an NCB - I haven't claimed, and it's a No Claims Bonus. Apparently it makes you more susceptible to an accident where you would make a claim....but still.

They don't like Ms if IIRC

Doh. I notice you also have to phone and can't do it online? Which is too much effort Admiral have come up pretty cheap again

[PawnSacrifice]

Agree with your point PVR

+1

Doh. I notice you also have to phone and can't do it online? Which is too much effort Admiral have come up pretty cheap again

Give Privilege a shout - they quoted me the equivalent of a £200 premium to change from my 2.5 to an M... didn't seem to fussed about anything else either, mods and experience wise.

[Mr Whippy]

I also think low price isn't so important vs good service when needed.

I'd rather spend £100 extra a year, and once every 20 years when I have a total loss (for example), that is only £2000 extra, but an insurer could easily screw you for that on a £15,000 car for example!
Worse still, they might just be useless, despite having almost default legal cover these days, not bothering to fight your corner and go knock for knock as an easy resolution etc.

Imo, insurers can only be judged on their claim performance. I'm surprised we are so obsessed by the lowest price ones in the UK when a cheap price can probably mean a cheap payout/fix too!


How have people found our top few insurers on the Z4 forum from a claims point of view (if needed?)

Things like approved repairers etc puts me right off. Good insurers let you use main dealer repairers (ie, BMW in our case) without extra charges.

Dave

[pvr]

Indeed check the small print. Some of them insist on using recycled parts for example (won't mention the company ...).

Mine is dealer repaired (ok, so I don't get a courtesy car if I don't go to an approved backstreet dealer).

[ChrisKnottIns]

I also think low price isn't so important vs good service when needed.

I'd rather spend £100 extra a year, and once every 20 years when I have a total loss (for example), that is only £2000 extra, but an insurer could easily screw you for that on a £15,000 car for example!
Worse still, they might just be useless, despite having almost default legal cover these days, not bothering to fight your corner and go knock for knock as an easy resolution etc.

Imo, insurers can only be judged on their claim performance. I'm surprised we are so obsessed by the lowest price ones in the UK when a cheap price can probably mean a cheap payout/fix too!


How have people found our top few insurers on the Z4 forum from a claims point of view (if needed?)

Things like approved repairers etc puts me right off. Good insurers let you use main dealer repairers (ie, BMW in our case) without extra charges.

Dave

Interestingly (and by sheer coincidence!), yesterday I was directed to this post on another forum about our claims service on Z4's -


Just thought i'd post this up as a kind of review of our club insurance scheme, and for those that think cheap insurance means a crap claims service!

Anyway, when we signed the club scheme, I insured my own car - BMW Z4 3.0 with these guys, as they managed to beat any quote I was getting (and no i dont get a discount for being the forum owner!).

Fast forward to last weekend and unfortunately I had a slight accident in the Z4 (due to a bend and a fox/dog), meaning a cracked alloy wheel and broken suspension on the Z4.

Rang BMW recovery, got the car recovered, and delivered to the local BMW dealer. BMW estimated around £11,000 of damage (replacing all 4 wheels, all suspension, front bumper, all trays underneath, new steering rack, and a few other bits and bobs so decided it was definitly a job for the insurance company!

Rang Chris Knott to place my claim, very helpful lady on the phone, said that there was a long call queue at the actual claims department so would ring me back. Which she did about half an hour later. Courtesy car also got dropped off the same day (a BMW 3 series).

Recieved a call from the BMW workshop the next day saying the insurer had given them the go ahead, and the parts where ordered.

Have just had a call from BMW now saying my car should be ready next week, and will be delivered back to me, and their courtesy car collected.

All in all, good service so far.

[texasjohn]

Why base experience requirements purely on duration of ownership? That is not the best way to gauge experience.

I could have owned a RWD car for 5 years and driven it a total of 2500 miles on quiet sundays, yet someone with a couple of months experience could have twice as many miles under their belt and better exposure to myriad day to day situations. In fact I would suggest the former of the two examples was the greater liability as with such a lack of regular use they never 'learn' the characteristics of the car.

[mikedav]

How would you verify 'miles covered' though...

[texasjohn]

True...