WTF is going on with insurance

My car was park at front of my house last summer and my stupid neighbour revers in it. Claimed from his policy cover as he was at fault (just to repair damage).

Now then, I need to renew my bike insurance and I have to pay approx £100 a year extra premium because of that incident.

Can someone please explain to me why(?), because when I asked I was told "I am at higher risk now"!!!
 
If you go into the insurance market believing that some degree of logic exists then you will eventually go mad.
 
My car was park at front of my house last summer and my stupid neighbour revers in it. Claimed from his policy cover as he was at fault (just to repair damage).

Now then, I need to renew my bike insurance and I have to pay approx £100 a year extra premium because of that incident.

Can someone please explain to me why(?), because when I asked I was told "I am at higher risk now"!!!

It’s bonkers but apparently the statistics show that if you have been involved in an accident there is a higher chance that you will have another - weird but true.
 
My car was park at front of my house last summer and my stupid neighbour revers in it. Claimed from his policy cover as he was at fault (just to repair damage).

Now then, I need to renew my bike insurance and I have to pay approx £100 a year extra premium because of that incident.

Can someone please explain to me why(?), because when I asked I was told "I am at higher risk now"!!!

Because it happened.....so their algorithm shows that it can happen again.
 
So if it happens again, his neighbours insurance will pay again so why should his premium go up?

Because he's been involved.
Even if blameless, he has become a statistic and been involved in an incident.
The algorithm has now loaded him into the numbers game.

The same happened to my girlfriend.
Her car was parked legally and correctly outside her house.
She was asleep in bed and awoke to a loud crashing sound and her car alarm going off.
A girl had moved away from a junction 100yds down and accelerated out of contol at such a rate that when she collided with my girlfriend's parked Rav 4, she took the rear corner out, bent the rear door jammed shut, shoved the Rav 4 up onto the pavement next to the neighbour's house and bent the rear axle so it jammed the wheel into the wheel arch, needing another vehicle to tow it back onto the road.
All this going uphill on a 1 in 4 hill.
The Rav 4 was a total loss write off.
Despite my girlfriend being in bed at the time and absolutely blame free regarding the incident, her excess was taken off her pending the guilty party paying up, and when she bought a replacement car of the same type, her premium was £50 more....because she'd been involved in an incident.
All because the insurance algorithm said that if it has happened, it is possible to happen again.

At least Dick Turpin wore a mask........
 
Odd one here...I was driving in my car through a sleepy village when a Royal Mail van pulled out of a side road and hit the rear side of my car. Driver accepted blame, claim went through fine and car repaired.

As all claims are now automatically logged (why are we asked if we’ve been involved in a claim if they already know) I was classed as ‘at risk’ on my wife’s insurance (I’m named driver) and premium was upped.

On my own insurance, strangely, my premium went down - how does that work??
 
So if it happens again, his neighbours insurance will pay again so why should his premium go up?

Despite the "fault" being assigned to the other driver, in most accidents there's some blame attributable to the "innocent" party too. Right of way doesn't tell the whole story, for example. In this case, if his neighbour has run into his parked vehicle once, he might do it again - he still has the same neighbour; his vehicle is still in the same place; the mix of the two is a proven a risk. We've all seen vehicles parked where they're simply begging to be hit: the insurance company aren't going to come round and check the fine details.
 
Just to say I'm very pleased with Bennetts. I'd never insure with them again, but they do sponsor BSB now and that's fantastic, because MCE's ridiculous "Big 'Ed" was always getting in the way!
 
Despite the "fault" being assigned to the other driver, in most accidents there's some blame attributable to the "innocent" party too. Right of way doesn't tell the whole story, for example. In this case, if his neighbour has run into his parked vehicle once, he might do it again - he still has the same neighbour; his vehicle is still in the same place; the mix of the two is a proven a risk. We've all seen vehicles parked where they're simply begging to be hit: the insurance company aren't going to come round and check the fine details.
All of which may be true,but is completely irrelevantt o the insurer.

They are not doing research on whether the innocent party in an accident carries some extra risk.

Their policies are based on simple actuarial statistics. If you make a claim, even as an innocent party, you're more likely to make another claim. As far as the insurance company is concerned, its as simple as that.
 
Despite the "fault" being assigned to the other driver, in most accidents there's some blame attributable to the "innocent" party too. Right of way doesn't tell the whole story, for example. In this case, if his neighbour has run into his parked vehicle once, he might do it again - he still has the same neighbour; his vehicle is still in the same place; the mix of the two is a proven a risk. We've all seen vehicles parked where they're simply begging to be hit: the insurance company aren't going to come round and check the fine details.

You understand this is bullshit, right?
 
Where can I read these actuarial statistics relating to the probability of someone who through no fault of their own have their car damaged by a third party, making another claim.

Are they secret statistics?
 
Where can I read these actuarial statistics relating to the probability of someone who through no fault of their own have their car damaged by a third party, making another claim.

Are they secret statistics?
I’m guessing the insurance companies do the research, or at least pay for it, and choose to keep it private. Don’t see any benefit for them in making the information public.
 
I’m guessing the insurance companies do the research, or at least pay for it, and choose to keep it private. Don’t see any benefit for them in making the information public.

So they can spout any old bollocks and it's taken as gospel.
 
All of which may be true,but is completely irrelevantt o the insurer.

They are not doing research on whether the innocent party in an accident carries some extra risk.

Their policies are based on simple actuarial statistics. If you make a claim, even as an innocent party, you're more likely to make another claim. As far as the insurance company is concerned, its as simple as that.

Interesting, in 2017 I had 3 accidents, I was static in traffic and in each incident a car went in the back of my car. Each claim was around £1200, I was not injured. Yet this year my insurance stayed the same?
 
Interesting, in 2017 I had 3 accidents, I was static in traffic and in each incident a car went in the back of my car. Each claim was around £1200, I was not injured. Yet this year my insurance stayed the same?
I'm guessing insurance companies use risk algorithms that incorporate many parameters, other than just accident history.
 
So they can spout any old bollocks and it's taken as gospel.
They don't have any obligation to explain their premium policies to you, me or anyone.

Its a market; if you don't like the premium finad another underwriter.
 
2018 GS TE, + 2018 Triumph Street Triple R. fully comp with Bennetts. Renewal just come in at £1055.91 and £600 excess for the year an increase of more than £500. WTF!!! 9yrs NCD, garaged no convictions. Also garage clause of 10pm - 6pm now deleted. No cover now unless in garage and locked.

50 mins on phone to CN and got the price down to £600 but would not include the Vario's. Told it was the GS that's the problem with a price tag of £17,600 including accessories. Won't be long before bikes become uninsurable.
 
Yea you probably hit their ceiling of around £25K for a collection and thus the bump in revenue
 
Yea you probably hit their ceiling of around £25K for a collection and thus the bump in revenue
Did some more research and you may be right.
Split them up and I get £220 with Hastings for the GS, all covered and £180 with Triumph. Need to haggle over the garage clause but way cheaper than the Bennetts price of £1055.
 


Back
Top Bottom