Chris Knott

Status
Not open for further replies.
mikedav said:
NikB said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 :)
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.

PawnSacrifice said:
They don't like Ms if IIRC :?
Click to expand...

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
 
mikedav said:
Agree with your point PVR :)
Click to expand...
+1

mikedav said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
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
 
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).
 
Mr Whippy said:
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
Click to expand...


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.
 
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.
 
There is no clear solution to this. However it would be good if I could get a direct answer to my questions from the insurers.

I do have a further question also - assuming I do buy a Z4 in the next few months and have to alter my policy with yourselves I understand that the underwriters will be changed to one that will cover me albeit at a higher premium. Will I have to pay a pro-rata rate to cover the insurance I've had from the current underwiter on the Golf?
 
texasjohn said:
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.
Click to expand...

But the claims stats suggest otherwise! They show that the former is less liability than the latter.

If the claims stats showed the other way round then we wouldn't be having this conversation!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom