Thumper Club Forum
Club House => Chatter => Topic started by: Ian on July 03, 2020, 11:02:38 PM
-
https://www.visordown.com/news/industry/competition-watchdog-has-bennetts-sale-under-microscope-0
-
Whole industry is a crooked proposal. Support a whole gamut of middle men, shareholders, managers who produce nothing but move money about and charge for the privilege.
Pay private companies to use public roads?
Pah!
-
Yep, the way it's run in Australia(?) makes much more sense. Third party insurance is provided by the govt. when you tax your vehicle every year. I believe you can then then purchase a fully comp. top policy from private insurance providers.
-
Yep, the way it's run in Australia(?) makes much more sense. Third party insurance is provided by the govt. when you tax your vehicle every year. I believe you can then then purchase a fully comp. top policy from private insurance providers.
Wouldn't that be fantastic. The problem with this country as Richard pointed out is the wholesale greed of large companies being let make billions of pounds off us poor saps at the bottom. Mass action is required, if no-one insured a vehicle for a month things would have to change. Not going to happen but it's a nice dream.
Ian
-
[/quote]
Wouldn't that be fantastic. The problem with this country as Richard pointed out is the wholesale greed of large companies being let make billions of pounds off us poor saps at the bottom. Mass action is required, if no-one insured a vehicle for a month things would have to change. Not going to happen but it's a nice dream.
Ian
[/quote]
Henceforth, renamed, "Citizen Smithy" ??👏
-
Surprising (not) how quickly this moves towards rants.
Almost as fast as an oil thread.
-
Far better solution is just don't use Bennetts or Carole Nash.
(Other well known and reliable insurance companies are available 👍)
-
Left Bennetts this year after they hiked the renewal price.
Every time Carole Nash quote they are expensive as they automatically include a rescue package I don't need as I get it via work.
Many of the otherwise good 'classic' insurance companies won't cover me as I use my bikes for work and work shifts so can't guarantee there being garaged overnight. I wouldn;t mind but ost of them are MZs!!
And going shopping through insurances every year is a time consuming pita I could do without. House, van, car, bikes - it takes hours of reading small print every time.
Must stop, blood pressure rising.......
-
Most deffo needs to be in rants now. 😡😡
-
Wouldn't that be fantastic. The problem with this country as Richard pointed out is the wholesale greed of large companies being let make billions of pounds off us poor saps at the bottom. Mass action is required, if no-one insured a vehicle for a month things would have to change. Not going to happen but it's a nice dream.
Ian
[/quote]
Henceforth, renamed, "Citizen Smithy" ??👏
[/quote]
Power to the people! Can I have mine in bhp though please. Now get off my pub.
Ian
-
THIS IS OFF TOPIC! :o :o :o
The secret is to insure each bike individually! ;)
I used the MCN ( OH GAWD! ::) ) insurance finder and after each search, wiped all the 'cookies', so that your past history of insurance searches 'disappears'. ;)
LV wanted £135 to insure the 1986 Morini K2 350, FC, this year and a further £65 to insure Sally SRX598 TPFT on a combined policy. So, I went on MCN and for the Morini alone, the best price was £60 from LV! :o Not sure how that works! :-\ Reduced price further by TPFT with 'Carole Nash Select' who then quoted £ 43-47. with Ageas (whom I believe have taken Carole Nash over?) The 'Carole Nash' price in the list of options of FC quotes was nearly as much as the initial LV quote and their TPFT quote was overpriced by a similar magnitude.
With Sally, 'Carole Nash Select' were able to shave a further £5 from the LV TPFT combined quote, for their TPFT, so bringing that down to £60.
So, all for a wee 'search' on the MCN insurance finder I saved £80 from my bill, with a like for like comparison and £97 by dropping the Morini to TPFT, which I am happy to do.
I hope this helps.
Finally, and "on message" (What twat thought that one up?), I too would prefer the Antipodean insurance model, but, their climate is sh!te and I don't wish to disturb them.
My regards, Bill
-
Finally, and "on message" (What twat thought that one up?), I too would prefer the Antipodean insurance model, but, their climate is sh!te and I don't wish to disturb them.
My regards, Bill
🤣👍
-
The report from Visordown did miss something, along with the insurance trade press (who really should have been checking what they had been fed), in that Ardonagh Group also own Footman James meaning that the access to markets are further narrowed. Additionally, Ardonagh Group own Autonet plus other motor vehicle intermediaries. Carole Nash were owned by the insurer Groupama who were taken over or merged (depending on standpoint) by Ageas but they did sell this to Towergate who are owned by... Ardonagh Group, however Ageas are still a key insurer partner to all those mentioned providing essentially the same insurance product - at different prices! The argument they will use to CMA is that each of the outlets will operate they're own profit centres providing different "rinky dinks" as their propositions.... until the operations are pulled into the Autonet single site call centre in Stoke-On-Trent so that they can achieve economy of scale so then they can dictate the market rates. Now I'm ranting on!
As Bill found - Motorcycle Insurance: pay your money once you've mastered the art of fooling the computers.
-
the govt provided tpo cover would have the effect of allowing people who normally wouldnt buy high performance cars because of thee insurance costs, do do just that though. some ned who passes his test and wants a beemer or a audi is currently restricted by the astronomical cost of cover for anything much bigger than a corsa will now be able to buy whatever they can afford. so the inexperienced drivers who curreently make up the highest insurance risk group are likely to be able to afford much faster and more powerful cars, and the likelyhood is that the cost of claims will skyrocket and those who are most likely to buy the aditional cover, older more experienced drivers, will be hit with increased costs as the price of bought insurance rises.
-
In fact, as I understand it, the Australian cover is minimum third party only. Similar cover is afforded in this country for uninsured drivers by the Motor Insurance Bureau. Of course, if they are involved in a collision thy can be prosecuted and the injured party(s) can be recompensed.
-
not quit. the mib provides for people who occur losses or personal injury as a result of uninsured drivers, it doesnt provide tpo cover for them.
if the uk moved to a govt provided tpo system, the accident rate would skyrocket amongst the young because even as it is they (specifically young men under 25 years old) make up the most accident prone group on the road statistically, and thats with them under the current system, and several studies show that the major limiting factor in vehicle choice for the young is the cost of insurance. remove that restriction and young drivers will have carte blanche to run any vehicle that they can afford, unencumbered by the cost of insuring it. meaning that if little johnny wanted to buy a 1000 quid fiesta knowing it would cost him a further 3 grand for insurance, now he has 4 grand to spend on a nice little bmw......
-
not quit. the mib provides for people who occur losses or personal injury as a result of uninsured drivers, it doesnt provide tpo cover for them.
That's what I meant, it is effectively minimal 3rd party cover as far as the 3rd party is concerned. Of course said driver would still be uninsured......
-
meaning that if little johnny wanted to buy a 1000 quid fiesta knowing it would cost him a further 3 grand for insurance, now he has 4 grand to spend on a nice little bmw......
It's easy enough to legislate round that though isn't it, after all they do it for motorcycles, and for the same reason! Make it illegal for anyone under the age of 25 to drive a car of more than say 60bhp, in fact they should introduce tiered driving tests for differing performance levels of cars, same as for bikes imho....
-
35 odd years back HMG of the day considered various alternative models to provide the statutory TPO/RTA cover amongst which was adding the TPO cost to the price paid for fuel at the pump. It made a lot of sense as it was pay as you go cover that (generally) related to on road miles exposure/risk with size & performance of the vehicle type (as well as driving styles) in it's usage of fuel. Considerations for VED were also brought into the modelling. Of course it never got real traction past the think tank stage most likely due to a whole raft of civil service jobs that would not have been needed even if the civil service were involved in handling claim incidents. It would probably have also increased thefts of fuel with jerry cans being a highly traded commodity.
-
I think it's more likely to have been the petrol companies that squealed.
-
It's easy enough to legislate round that though isn't it, after all they do it for motorcycles, and for the same reason! Make it illegal for anyone under the age of 25 to drive a car of more than say 60bhp, in fact they should introduce tiered driving tests for differing performance levels of cars, same as for bikes imho....
I couldn’t agree more Pete 👍
-
At the moment we ration access to high performance vehicles by how wealthy you are, rather than by proven driving/riding ability or even maturity.
That has begun to change for motorcycles but, if I'm wealthy enough, I can walk out of a dealership with some Italian supercar in exchange for a big enough cheque. Somebody will insure me, given another cheque.