rich5315 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 and dont you think the insurance companies exploit drivers because having motor insurance to drive a motor vehicle is a legal requirement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snook Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 This thread has been done twice before, just so ya know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 and dont you think the insurance companies exploit drivers because having motor insurance to drive a motor vehicle is a legal requirement! But driving a motor vehicle is a privilege, not some sort of God-given right. You pay for your privileges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I once read somewhere that insurance and betting are basically the same industry, only one is trusted with your money and the other isn't. It's kind of true as well, you give a company some money in order to get a bigger payout if an event which you agree to (on their terms) actually happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mort Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Threads merged. Please use the search facility before starting new threads. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tallanddopey Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 It's kind of true as well, you give a company some money in order to get a bigger payout if an event which you agree to (on their terms) actually happens. that wasnt true on the news, the male had an insurance quote of over 3k, but im pretty sure that car wasnt worth that. since i was 17 (im now 22) when i passed my test my insurance has actually increased over they years. car insurance is daylight robery and the high rates just mean more an more people simply dont bother getting any, as in the end the police do very little about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 that wasnt true on the news, the male had an insurance quote of over 3k, but im pretty sure that car wasnt worth that. If he says something running in the 2.40 at Kempton is a dead cert, I'd stay away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 that wasnt true on the news, the male had an insurance quote of over 3k, but im pretty sure that car wasnt worth that. since i was 17 (im now 22) when i passed my test my insurance has actually increased over they years. car insurance is daylight robery and the high rates just mean more an more people simply dont bother getting any, as in the end the police do very little about it. Is the amount of damage you can cause with a car directly related to the value of the car? If you kill (or seriously injure) somebody with a car worth £500, is the cost of the accident (apart from the cost to your £500 car) any less than the cost if you do the same with a £60,000 car? (Apart from the damage to that car.) Some years ago, when Vauxhall Cavaliers were popular cars with Sales Reps, if you bought a Cavalier you could expect to pay 'over the odds' for insurance. Not because there was anything wrong with the car, but because they figured highly in accident statistics. Given that smaller cars are more often driven by younger drivers than larger, more expensive cars, is it possible that - irrespective of the insurance grouping (which, from personal experience doesn't seem to mean as much as they say it does) then the premiums for those cars are elevated? - Particularly when they're driven by younger (and usually relatively less-experienced) drivers? If the government was seriously interested in reducing insurance premiums (and I doubt that they are at all interested) then the first thing they should do is shift the costs (back) where they belong. In the UK, medical treatment is provided (and funded) by the NHS. In the event of an RTA, the NHS 'recoups' (steals?) the cost from the car insurer. Does the NHS recoup the cost of smoking-related disease from tobacco companies? Are holiday companies billed for skin cancer treatment? Do the junk food companies pay for obesity-related treatment? Do the breweries/distilleries pay for alcohol-related treatment? No they don't. So why should car insurers pay for the cost of treating injuries caused by car accidents? The second thing they should do is eliminate Tort claims for injuries. Adopt a system similar to that used in New Zealand, with fixed payouts. The third thing would be to introduce 'No Fault' insurance. Each company pays the (insured) costs of the other party. Then premiums might fall. - Particularly for those who don't have a bad record of being involved in accidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 I once read somewhere that insurance and betting are basically the same industry Essentially yes. An insurance policy is a gamble, but it's one you hope to lose. You bet that something catastrophic will happen to you, and if it does the insurance company pays out; if it doesn't, they keep your stake money. The whole point, of course, being that by using statistical averages instead of individual circumstances, no one person is forced to pay the entire cost of a disaster, it being spread instead over a large number of policyholders. This new EU ruling runs counter to the whole idea of insurance; and if taken to its literal extreme, would mean that the cost of a £25,000 insurance policy would be £25,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel9807 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 this will make you all chckle lol i have a Nissan Primera GT n it costs me about £300 a year to insure. add my 21 year old son on the insurance n it goes to £900, how ever i add my 19 year old son on as well n it goes up to £1800. this is the funny part if i take my 19 year old son off n add my 21 year old sons girlfriend on it (shes 19) it goes down to about £750. me personally think that all insurance premiums should be the same price no matter of what sex they are i think it stinks. my 19 yr old son is looking for his own car after being on my isurance for almost 3 yrs (in june when hes 20) coz he cant afford to folkout for the insurance n he still looking at around 1500 for a 1.2 corsa. it really winds me up when i see a woman putting makeup on in the car whilst driving. dunno if anybody on here does that but it really winds me up. i also think that it sucks that its cheaper for other job types, bus, lorry drivers get cheaper insurance. why is this it only take a split second to loose your concentration and cause a serious accident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.