Conference terri::cars_uk

Aaaahhhh, I see. They should pay the claim regardless of whether it was 
proved that it was truck or not ? "Oh, you said it was our truck and not your 
fault, well here's some dosh then" How about if I go and say you hit me. Even 
if you were in the area, might you not like a little proof ?

Of course there are some dodgy people around. Do you think he wouldn't be 
sacked by his employer if they found out ? You could find out who they were, 
they were probably resident; write to the Insurance Company.

    I think we can all run off stories of insurance fiddles and alike but
    the big issue with these insurance companies is that the real cost of
    insuring your car is not due to the risk you pose to the insurance
    company but what they can squeeze out of you. Insurance companies
    reinvest your premiums and if they make a total mess of these
    investments you end up paying more next time round, but the rub is they
    blame you the car driver as being the prime cause. Insurance companies
    will use statistics such as " the stolen vehicles have increased by
    35%", but they don't tell you what the starting figure was in the first
    place, so if 5% of all cars insured get stolen, but the premiums have
    risen by 25 to 50% or more this increase in cash will exceed the
    increase in stolen cars of 1.75% (5 x 35% = 1.75%). This increase is to
    cover the losses due to poor investments, eg property. You are unlikely
    ever to see the real figures. Its a bit like the road tax and petrol
    tax where only a small percentage gets used for road transport.
    
    If insurance is such a bad risk why are there so many insurance
    companies? Its one big rip off!
     

Insurance is not, generally, a bad risk. Motor Insurance is, generally, a bad 
risk. It is known as "accomodation business". IE if you don't do it, then 
there is an awful lot of more profitable business that you won't get.

This is slightly different with a Lloyds syndicate where their running 
expenses and their payouts are usually lower and therefore they can get 
closer to breaking even. 

This is all talking of an "underwriting profit/loss". If you take into 
account investment, then they usually break even or make a profit. However, 
of course they charge more the next year to recover investment losses. I 
guess the alternative is they make no investments and charge you LOADS more.

    
    Of course insurance is a "rip-off". If it wasn't there wouldn't be lots
    of big insurance companies with lots of employees and directors earning
    lots of money. Now, I'm not necessarily decrying this, If I could think
    of a business schema which people would have to subscribe to and which
    I could make lots of money from doing so I would be daft not to do so.
    However, it does seem unjustified that these people can put up their
    premiums and everybody, whether they live in low risk areas driving low
    risk vehicles or not get their premiums nearly doubled. Why do I now 10
    years later on pay nearly as much insurance for my AXGT as I used to
    for my LOTUS SEVEN when I live in the same area and now have maximum
    no-claims? I've never had a theft claim even.
    
    My initial point though in .0 wasn't the fact that the punter may or
    may not have been "trying it on" or whether the insured (*NOT* the
    insurance company) were being duped, but that the insured were willing
    to admit to the accident (they may have even checked the vehicle and
    found damage in keeping with the "victims" claim.) My point is that it
    was left to the WHIM of some loud-mouthed employee of the insurance
    company who hadn't got the scruples not to teach his friend how to
    defraud his insurance company whilst with his next breath deprive a
    "possibly" valid claimant. Perhaps there should be a session on
    Professional Ethics for insurance claims staff. 
    
    To be quite honest I don't think that this person typified the majority 
    of staff who work for insurance companies, but as in this case it's the 
    few bad pennies who get everyone else a bad name. However, as with
    football hooligans, bent coppers, perverted priests etc. it's always
    best to take care and know that everyone doesn't have your interests at
    heart, even though they are supposed to be working in "your" benefit.
    
    Ian

TALKING ABOUT INSURANCE!!

I have a seventeen year old daughter, who, like all teenagers wants to learn 
to drive, at the moment she is having lessons with the driving school  
(she has had ten lessons up to now) but of course would also like to drive in 
mums car for extra practice.  Does anybody out there know of an insurance 
company that will not charge me about �6000 just to let her behind the wheel.
I have a G reg Renault 1.7.  There must be a lot of people out there that 
have come across the same proble.

Regards   

One weary mum.  

    Yes, get a Digital company car or borrow one.
    
    DEC's insurance covers learner drivers.
    
    Royston

You could but her a Fiat 126. I'm sure that won't cost 6k to insure. Probably
6K for the car plus insurance.

/s

    
    RE-young at heart!
    
    I can relate to this,as it was only 2 years ago when I was at that
    tender age.My advice to you is to try an insurance company called 
    Bradford and Pennign (sp?),they claim to be "generous" towards leaner
    drivers.I'll get you a phone number and post it here on friday (as i'm
    out tommorow)
    
    	Hope this helps a little,and welcome your daughter into the club of
    high insurance premiums.
    
    
    Andy...Young,dumb and driving. (just)

Bradford and Penine will not deal direct. Most brokers have agencies with 
them. Certainly people like Sheltons, Bennetts and Motorquote will have.

> Bradford and Pennign (sp?),they claim to be "generous" towards leaner drivers

	No good for me then! :-)

	Ian.	

    re.11
    
    	No good for me either, I've dreamed of being young and leaner,
    instead of old and .... well .... plump.
    
    				Malcolm.

    I had always thought that it was just after you pass the test that you 
    got clobbered for insurance. Surely, if you are a learner, you are
    under the control of an experienced driver and therefore no more of a
    risk than the qualified driver.
    
    Terry