JayDee

I think car insurance should be means tested. As it is The super rich can cause huge expensive amounts of damage in the knowledge that they will always be able to find someone to insure their next F40.

Prince Naseem's relative is a case in point. I bet he'll be back in a McLaren F1 next week

Point is - premiums for the super rich should be superloaded, so that us lesser mortals don't end up subsidising their carelessness with our premiums.

JD

Neil Smalley

It is. It's called buying a cheaper, slower car

fast bloke

Insurance should be a non-profit making service run by the government. They insist we buy it, then let profiteering insurance companies rip us off by inventing their own prices. Since I started driving I've paid in the region of 15 grand for car insurance. The scoob (valued at about 14k) is the best car I've owned. In the same time I've paid 1600 quid in total for (entirely optional) house insurance for a 140 grand house and 50 grand contents insurance...

ndouglass

I blame all these american style ads that we see on our screens
"Been injured in an accident that wasn't your fault? No Win No Fee"
It's this that's causing a hell of a lot of claims from people who wouldn't normally claim. A way of making a fast buck at everyone elses expense, I had an accident 2 years ago that wasn't my fault. I ached for about 2 weeks but I never made any story about neck/back injury that's made my life a misery. I was happy to get away in one piece.

Dodgy claimer reading this "p155 off & work for your money"

Every time I see these adverts I could kick the TV in..

tarmacterrorist

I switch channels when those ads come on.
I do think that this kind of service has bumped premiums up.

robski

Interesting points guys!

re being means tested, it is already if you think about it, but based on the value of the car you drive. But at least at the moment you get a choice about do you scrimp for an expensive car, or just drive a shed, Ive got mates in both camps.

Fast bloke. If the government supported it, you would pay more, thats for sure. They are incapable of running anything approaching how comlex the whole area of insurance is. The company I work for loose millions on motor insurance. The only way they approach breaking even is to invest the premiums collected until they have to pay them out as claims.

The claim culture is indeed part of the problem causing increased premiums. So are repair costs (more expensive parts, usually colour coded etc etc). The goverment also increase YOUR insurance by making the health authorities get back costs for treating road accident victims from the ins cos.

pwebb, it doesnt really work like that. Its more based on claims experience over a long time. Doesnt use whole postcode either (usually).

robski

pwebb

you could argue that it already is 'means tested' - in a way, since your postcode is used to load the premium - ie folks living in areas with higher average income get to pay more insurance than those in lower rated areas - this is disguised as being a loading to take account of the higher average value of any cars stolen - but it is, in effect, a cynical way to extract more revenue from those that can supposedly afford it.

Paul W - postcode WA15 - highest in the North West fwiw.

(just waiting for those on the BBS that are in the insurance trade to reply stating that insurance companies never make any profit , are all hard done by, much maligned etc... save your breath guys - you just need to take a look at the buildings these companies have as their HQs to see that they are making indecent sums of money at our expense. Or even compare prices with European insurance companies - no surprise that AXA is making such headway over here - they must think this is treasure island compared to France!)

matt_d

Insurance companies as an industry aren't any more profitable than other sectors that have been around for a while. Most insurance companies actually make a loss on their underwriting activities - 100% of their profit comes from investing premiums in bonds, stocks etc. So the insured motoring public is currently getting subsidised by the insurance industry.

Laws already exist to penalise rich dangerous drivers (i.e. penalty points, bans, threat of jail).

A nationalised motor insurance industry would mean non-drivers subsidising high-risk motorists like Scooby drivers. Poor pay, low skill levels, and lack of motivation of many government sector workers would result in a substandard service which lost loads of money each year, and took ages to process every claim. You wouldn't be able to do anything about it, because no one would take complaints seriously, and there would be no other company you could take your business to if you were dissatisfied.

Lastly, there is no evidence that rich drivers are any worse than poor ones. If anything, someone in an expensive car is more likely to be careful than someone in a cheap crappy one. Crashing a Porsche is rather embarrassing old boy, but crashing a Nova is a good laugh innit mate?