Alex C. Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 you got proof of your figures? 120% isn't across the entire market, but direct line reported a 120.2% combined operating ratio in August. Admiral are market leaders and they have a combined ratio of 89%, but that is one of the lowest in the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Car insurance is a rip off, it is also a tax, but not one for communal good one for the benefit of private companies. I don't think I'll be paying for insurance, I'd rather get fined in court and/or jailed. You get fed quite well, better than you could feed yourself if you paid car insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loubbe Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Car insurance is a rip off, it is also a tax, but not one for communal good one for the benefit of private companies. I don't think I'll be paying for insurance, I'd rather get fined in court and/or jailed. You get fed quite well, better than you could feed yourself if you paid car insurance. I have been hit by an uninsured car. Not as a driver, as a pedestrian. He lost control and mounted the pavement. Had he been insured, I may well have been given substantial compensation for my extremely serious injuries. Insurance is expensive, but could you really live with yourself if you seriously injured, or even killed someone, and you could not even try to recompense them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denlin Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 They must be getting insurance at some point or they are not taxing vehicles either because you can't get tax without insurance docs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I have been hit by an uninsured car. Not as a driver, as a pedestrian. He lost control and mounted the pavement. Had he been insured, I may well have been given substantial compensation for my extremely serious injuries. Insurance is expensive, but could you really live with yourself if you seriously injured, or even killed someone, and you could not even try to recompense them? I wouldn't be happy about accidentally killing someone if I was insured or not. If I had insurance I wouldn't compensate them, my insurers would. If I didn't, I would not compensate them either. I'm beginning to think we should have no insurance whatsoever and instead we should increase petrol taxation to fund the NHS. If I kill someone in a car, or if I am killed by someone in a car, the NHS are going to be the ones picking up the pieces. I don't want an insurance company profiting out of this. A relative of mine was killed by a driver, who was insured, but he was travelling at 80mph+ in a 40 zone. My relative died, he got a small fine and the insurers valued my relatives life at about £20k. People driving carelessly and killing others should be jailed, if it is a genuine accident then let them off entirely, get the injured to a hospital prompto and hope they survive. For £20k I'd have rather the driver was jailed for 6 months (if its still 40k per year to keep a prisoner) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 If I kill someone in a car, or if I am killed by someone in a car, the NHS are going to be the ones picking up the pieces. I don't want an insurance company profiting out of this. And how are you going to recompense the family for their sudden loss of income, and/or pay the long term care costs of someone you leave permanently disabled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 And how are you going to recompense the family for their sudden loss of income, and/or pay the long term care costs of someone you leave permanently disabled? People don't. The NHS absorbs the care costs, and DWP can sort out the income. If you kill a single unemployed person, perhaps the DWP should pay you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 People don't. The NHS absorbs the care costs, and DWP can sort out the income. If you kill a single unemployed person, perhaps the DWP should pay you? The NHS does not provide full time care services unless admitted to a continuing care home and then only if a family are deemed unable to contribute. Family members are often expected to give up their jobs leading to a double loss of income. DWP isn't going to cover that loss. The long and short of it is that compensation serves a purpose, very little of it is for 'pain and suffering'. No one should have to suffer significant financial loss because someone else was too irresponsible to get insurance. There's a reason why third party insurance is compulsory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkeyLover Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I am shocked at the increase in beer prices and am considering shoplifting my beer from now on. It's tough on the shopkeeper, the same as stealing money from his wallet, but what am I supposed to do if the price of something is more than I am willing to pay? Well? Simple - go without! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riche Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Damn why pay for owt, just nick what you want and pay for nowt. If you consume you pay. Don't drive a car and you will have loads of wonga. Scum will always drive with no insurance in any circumstance. It is uninsured drivers that bump up premiums any how. Dob em in or trash thier car and watch them weep. They aint insured cos they are freeloadin scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.