Insurance of 1994 Car MORE than a 1996?

fatboypee

Hi,

I'm simply bemused by this. Long story short, my 1996 1.8 Vectra has died. I have swapped my insurance to a 1994 1.8 Cavalier.

Renewal was due on the Vectra, 3rd ParyF&T came in at €339. Same cover on the Cavalier is €480 :eek:

I realise this is probly to do with the insurers quoting for the vectra not covering older cars but this car is worth nothing really. Additionally, given the residual values of either being negligible and the cover is 3rd party anyway, how the heck can there be a difference ? And if its to do with some insurers not covering older cars, on 3rd party, why not ???

Simply befuddled by this.

Also, anyone got a recommendation for an insurer that does give good prices for older cars?

Thanks

fbp.

123ie are competitive at the moment I believe.

fatboypee

RoverJames wrote: »

123ie are competitive at the moment I believe.

Thanks but last time I tried, even for the Vectra the website told me it would not even quote :rolleyes:, since then I've steered well clear of them.

bazz26

The Vectra you had is probably the newer MkII model. The Cavalier is basically the MkI Vectra that was sold here which means that it probably has a lower safety rating than the newer model. Also insurance companies base their premiums on what they think they would have to fork out to you and third parties in the event of an accident.

Yes both cars are worth very little but insurance is about more than just paying out to replace the car, that is the least of their concern. However due to poorer safety ratings on the older car, there is a higher risk of personal injuries to occupants in the event of an accident. No offence but either of those cars would probably fold in a serious accident compared to more modern cars, this is what they are assessing.

metzengerstein

ive my 94 car insured with 123,this is my 2nd year with them .
ive had no trouble with them whatsoever.

i dont know if they have changed anything since i started with them.but i dont see whay they wont insure it for you .

i know some places wont insure a car under more than 10 years old .
i really hate that, old cars are better than the new s**te on the market these days .built better ,last longer and you can do alot of work yourself .

dougie-lampkin

It's cheaper for me to insure a '94 1.3 Mini than a '96 1.0 Micra, and I'm 19. So safety rating certainly isn't a factor.

Also, personal injuries are irrelevant, seeing as it's TPF+T the OP is getting.

And for my 2p, I'd fancy my chances in a Cavalier far more than in a modern supermini in any accident.

Mr Benevolent

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

And for my 2p, I'd fancy my chances in a Cavalier far more than in a modern supermini in any accident.

I wouldn't.

fatboypee

bazz26 wrote: »

The Vectra you had is probably the newer MkII model. The Cavalier is basically the MkI Vectra that was sold here which means that it probably has a lower safety rating than the newer model. Also insurance companies base their premiums on what they think they would have to fork out to you and third parties in the event of an accident.

Yes both cars are worth very little but insurance is about more than just paying out to replace the car, that is the least of their concern. However due to poorer safety ratings on the older car, there is a higher risk of personal injuries to occupants in the event of an accident. No offence but either of those cars would probably fold in a serious accident compared to more modern cars, this is what they are assessing.

Good point, guess then its the injuries to the other parties in the car in te event of an accident that push the premium up.

Thanks,

Wife threatening me with a 1 litre :eek: car unless I can get a better quote...

savagecabbages

I think its down to the amount of claims made on a type car jacking the prices up. More claims means higher loading.

Also curiously enough with my first car i was getting lower quotes if i valued the car at a higher value?!? i' talking €1500 got me a higher quote than €2000. Valuing the car at €3000 got me the best quote, and any values higher than that made no difference...

bazz26

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

And for my 2p, I'd fancy my chances in a Cavalier far more than in a modern supermini in any accident.

A common misconception that bigger = safer.

This test proves otherwise:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emtLLvXrrFs

bazz26

Another factor might be that the Cavalier might not have an immobiliser fitted whereas the Vectra probably does as they were starting to be introduced around the mid 1990s. No immobiliser means the car is easier to steal as it can be started without needing the key.

dougie-lampkin

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

Also, personal injuries are irrelevant, seeing as it's TPF+T the OP is getting.

Are passengers not 3rd parties ?

fatboypee

bazz26 wrote: »

Another factor might be that the Cavalier might not have an immobiliser fitted whereas the Vectra probably does as they were starting to be introduced around the mid 1990s. No immobiliser means the car is easier to steal as it can be started without needing the key.

Neither quotation requested information on alarms or immobilisers..