Insurance company not quoting cars older than 2002

DARK-KNIGHT

What's with this? I was gonna buy a 2000 polo and insure it and I'm having trouble getting quotes for a car that age

33 yo male driver full licence no claims etc

Mycroft H

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

What's with this? I was gonna buy a 2000 polo and insure it and I'm having trouble getting quotes for a car that age

33 yo male driver full licence no claims etc

Insurance making up rules as they see older cars and those who drive them as a higher risk.

It's nonsense. My car isn't going to become a deathtrap next year all of a sudden.

Lellostag

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

What's with this? I was gonna buy a 2000 polo and insure it and I'm having trouble getting quotes for a car that age

33 yo male driver full licence no claims etc

Well, that's insurance companies for you... No doubt we will start seeing an increase in scrapped oldish cars, which of course are still in perfectly good condition. In other words cars aged between 16 and 29 years are pretty much worthless unless you are prepared to pay annual insurance premiums that are way more than the actual value of the car. Some cars will of course qualify for classic insurance when they're 20 years old, but no such luck with many Japanese cars (they're probably way too reliable to be considered a classic...). :mad:

I wouldn't be surprised if this is encouraged by the car dealer lobbyists to try and get as many people as possible to buy a new car instead of continuing driving their perfectly good 16 year old cars.... :rolleyes:

ironclaw

Mycroft H wrote: »

Insurance making up rules as they see older cars and those who drive them as a higher risk.

It's nonsense. My car isn't going to become a deathtrap next year all of a sudden.

Making it up? Perhaps it's backed by their risks assessments? Insurance is a numbers game, their is obviously a reason they are not insuring older cars which doesn't necessarily have to do with screwing people, it could simply be an economic decision. What interest would an insurance company, in pretty much a sure fire market as we have to have insurance, have by removing a sizable chunk of its market? 'Sorry, we don't need that extra X million in revenue so we don't insure that end of the market'

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the insurance company policies, but there's a reason they are doing it and its cold, hard numbers that's driving it. See the countless other threads on this topic and the payouts that insurance companies are being hit with.

Now, the cynical part of me has noticed a rapid uptake in finance and PCP in Ireland. If you can't get a quote on an older car, would many be tempted to take out finance and say 'Why not?' I think the average Joe Soap would. Now, why would an insurance company be driving that? Financial Institutions are fairly well wound together and they each have a vested interest in the market. Its a completely personal conspiracy theory, but the thought had crossed my mind and if I had significant holdings in the sector, I'd be pushing it if the market research and numbers added up.

OP, you can get a quote THird Party only from most insurers. It mightn't be great but it is possible. In that end of the market, the cost of a comprehensive policy is the cost of replacing the car, so you are better off getting the best Third Party you can and writing off the car in the event of an accident.

Lellostag

ironclaw wrote: »

... and the payouts that insurance companies are being hit with.

You are of course right, although it is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy as well insofar that the more expensive the insurance is the likelier it is that people will try and recover a good bit of that cost with sometimes dubious claims. At least that's the feeling I get from this whole debacle. The car dealers will though no doubt be happy when more and more people are pretty much forced into buy a new or newer car... :rolleyes:

lazeedaisy

I had heard this, and was dreading my renewal, as my car is now 15 years old.

There was no difference in last years insurance for me,

myrak

So what is the point of the NCT?

Who drives older cars? - the young, the old and the careful.

And the govt who insist on the NCT say.....nothing.

pudzey101

its a funny country , I'd consider most older cars (99-09) safer than most new off the production line cars , many of the cars i see crashed or up on tow-trucks seem to be 2011 +

Lellostag

pudzey101 wrote: »

its a funny country , I'd consider most older cars (99-09) safer than most new off the production line cars , many of the cars i see crashed or up on tow-trucks seem to be 2011 +

I agree. The only ones really benefitting from forcing/pricing out the slightly older cars are the car dealers (especially the main dealers) and the government through VRT and VAT from new car sales...

mgbgt1978

lazeedaisy wrote: »

I had heard this, and was dreading my renewal, as my car is now 15 years old.

There was no difference in last years insurance for me,

It's mainly aimed at people looking for a new quote, as opposed to those just renewing their policy with the same company and the same car.......for now;).

bazz26

myrak wrote: »

So what is the point of the NCT?

Who drives older cars? - the young, the old and the careful.

And the govt who insist on the NCT say.....nothing.

The NCT is a small aspect of this new policy. The main drive by insurance companies is more to do with the safety standards of old cars from a design point of view . A 2002 car is more likely to deemed less safe than say a 2012 model. The reason being that safety standards on cars has moved on in that time.

The insurance company's logic and they probably have stats to prove their stance, is that there is a higher probability of occupants having life changing injuries or worse from being involved in a rta in an old car than in a newer car. And more serious injuries equals higher payouts for insurance companies. Having a valid NCT can have little bearing on that outcome.

curiosity

bazz26 wrote: »

The NCT is a small aspect of this new policy. The main drive by insurance companies is more to do with the safety standards of old cars from a design point of view . A 2002 car is more likely to deemed less safe than say a 2012 model. The reason being that safety standards on cars has moved on in that time.

The insurance company's logic and they probably have stats to prove their stance, is that there is a higher probability of occupants having life changing injuries or worse from being involved in a rta in an old car than in a newer car. And more serious injuries equals higher payouts for insurance companies. Having a valid NCT can have little bearing on that outcome.

Given the number of make/models that fall on both sides of the 15 years old line, it makes me wonder about the stats. Take two cars that are still fairly common on our roads, the first generation Yaris (1999-2005, from wikipedia) and the first generation Focus (1998-2004). Is there a huge decrease in the safety of such cars once they pass 15 years of age? With a 13 year old Focus under me at the moment, I'm wondering if I should consider a newer machine soon. Will the average 'more mature' car be subject to a hefty extra insurance premium, or be unsellable?;)

bazz26

curiosity wrote: »

Given the number of make/models that fall on both sides of the 15 years old line, it makes me wonder about the stats. Take two cars that are still fairly common on our roads, the first generation Yaris (1999-2005, from wikipedia) and the first generation Focus (1998-2004). Is there a huge decrease in the safety of such cars once they pass 15 years of age? With a 13 year old Focus under me at the moment, I'm wondering if I should consider a newer machine soon. Will the average 'more mature' car be subject to a hefty extra insurance premium, or be unsellable?;)

I'm guessing there are other factors involved too.

danoriordan1402

Am dreading my renewal also of my 01 passat - immaculate car, serviced well, 130k on it. sad day if it has to be part of a scrap deal...

Jesus.

The poor guy with an old car has to pay higher tax (generally) and higher insurance than the guy who can afford a newer car.

Doesn't surprise me

beauf

bazz26 wrote: »

...The main drive by insurance companies is more to do with the safety standards of old cars from a design point of view . A 2002 car is more likely to deemed less safe than say a 2012 model. The reason being that safety standards on cars has moved on in that time. ...

They always find some new reason. They used to increase the premium for a new car as it was more expensive to get repaired. I would guess that a lot of younger people starting out, drive older (cheaper) cars, and thus are more likely to have accidents. Perhaps scams are more likely to involve older cars. Who knows they find a different reason every time.

Also the insurance companies prefer to settle than go to court. Which personally I think is increasing fraud. Which is rising the cost.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/car-insurance-premiums-to-jump-by-further-25-industry-warns-1.2352457

The level of awards being made in the courts is at an all-time high. The average High Court award in 2014 was up 34 per cent on 2013 and the average Circuit Court award was up 14 per cent on 2013,” Mr Thompson said. “ In litigated cases, legal costs in Ireland account for more than 60 per cent of the compensation awarded.”

All told 80 per cent of motor injury claims in the Republic are for whiplash, Mr Thompson said and he described the payouts associated with such claims as being out of step with EU norms. “The figures on whiplash alone are very stark,” he said. “In Ireland the average award for whiplash is €15,000, in the UK, the corresponding figure is €5,000.” In Spain and Italy the average payout for such a claim is around €2,000.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/legal-costs-in-ireland-are-now-highest-in-western-world-1.2053218

beauf

The end result will be pricing people off the road to alternative transport, where they can. It will shrink their own market.

JohnBoy26

bazz26 wrote: »

The NCT is a small aspect of this new policy. The main drive by insurance companies is more to do with the safety standards of old cars from a design point of view . A 2002 car is more likely to deemed less safe than say a 2012 model. The reason being that safety standards on cars has moved on in that time.

The insurance company's logic and they probably have stats to prove their stance, is that there is a higher probability of occupants having life changing injuries or worse from being involved in a rta in an old car than in a newer car. And more serious injuries equals higher payouts for insurance companies. Having a valid NCT can have little bearing on that outcome.

The thing is tough many new models launched in 2001-2002 were in production well into the noughties yet the earliest examples are now uninsurable (from companies with the age rule.) Whilst the newer example of the same car with the same safety will have no problem being insured.

For example what's the difference in safety between an 2002 Mazda 6 and a 2005 Mazda 6?

They are exactly the same car yet someone taking out a new policy on the older car won't be able to do so from insurance companies with the age rule.

Most cars launched in the 00's, in general, had good safety ratings anyway.

Mycroft H

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

The thing is tough many new models launched in 2001-2002 were in production well into the noughties yet the earliest examples are now uninsurable (from companies with the age rule.) Whilst the newer example of the same car with the same safety will have no problem being insured.

For example what's the difference in safety between an 2002 Mazda 6 and a 2005 Mazda 6?

They are exactly the same car yet someone taking out a new policy on the older car won't be able to do so from insurance companies with the age rule.

Most cars launched in the 00's, in general, had good safety ratings anyway.

See this is the nub of it. And why I think it's just an easy way to gain profit.

If there was a car that was deemed to be too risky or doesn't meet a certain crash test rating, then fair enough. Decline to insure it then. But there are plenty of safe cars with ABS/EBD, many airbags and a solid NCAP rating from the early 00s. But no, its easier and lazier to blanket refuse to insure them at all.

Bigus

pudzey101 wrote: »

its a funny country , I'd consider most older cars (99-09) safer than most new off the production line cars , many of the cars i see crashed or up on tow-trucks seem to be 2011 +

Very scientific observation there pudzey. In making your consideration what factors did you take into account ?

dr.fuzzenstein

Jesus. wrote: »

The poor guy with an old car has to pay higher tax (generally) and higher insurance than the guy who can afford a newer car.

Doesn't surprise me

That's how that works. People with less money are open to be screwed by everyone. Have to drive a cheap, old car? Jaysis, we'll screw you for tax and insurance. Can't afford a new one? Too had, fcuk you. Because that same person will also have no access to finance, or maybe only at a higher rate (screwed again) which they can't afford to pay back anyway.
Its bollocks, pure and simple. I played the quote game a few months ago and went on a German insurance site. Nearly 20 year old, 2.2 petrol BMW, TPF for around 500 quid. In Ireland that car would he uninsurable. Of course its also to do with the fact that in Germany payout for whiplash is 500 quid, while here it's 15 grand.

carzony

beauf wrote: »

The end result will be pricing people off the road to alternative transport, where they can. It will shrink their own market.

Sadly you will also have people who say feck it and decide to drive without insurance. My neighbour has a 00 passat and he was telling me a few weeks ago that he couldnt even get a quote from anywhere with the car he's driving. I can't be sure but I reckon he has no insurance the last few weeks as the cert in the window is out of date.

In one way I don't blame people for it though. My own car is acting up and if it can't be fixed the only thing I could afford would be at most a 00 - 02 car. Still can't believe the insurance industry has gotten away with this new rule.

beauf

The other side of it is that your current insurer is likely to give you a renewal. But you won't be able to shop around anymore. So they can charge you what they like.

Its not just insurance either. Why NCT, tax or repair an old car if you think you won't be able to get insurance for it next year.

Lellostag

beauf wrote: »

Why NCT, tax or repair an old car if you think you won't be able to get insurance for it next year.

Very true. I'm partly regretting having had the timing belt changed on our '03 Mazda 6, even if it was overdue.... if it goes bang in the next year or two it wouldn't matter much as the car is essentially worthless in a couple of years anyway. Dreading renewal time in March, as we've already SORN'd our second car due to it no longer being feasible to insure it (we use it very little, will just have to start cycling more instead...).

beauf

I was lucky not to have much of an increase this year. I can see car pooling among the family group and things like electric bikes, scooters being consider more seriously.

td2008

Might be a bit naive here but these loadings to cover setanta/quinn etc - was there ever a timeframe given for that

Jesus.

beauf wrote: »

Why NCT, tax or repair an old car if you think you won't be able to get insurance for it next year.

Those who said the NCT was a racket may have the last laugh yet...

ceekay74

Anyone know if there's a list of companies that will insure an 18 yr old car?

rb25

Insurance companies (car/health/house) are in the business of risk. But rarely do they seem to acknowledge that they don't actually take any risk in insuring people. Because if I have a crash this year they hike my premium next year and take back whatever they paid out to me for repairs the previous year. The majority of people don't crash. So not only do they have my premium paid for the year I had the crash they then have my renewed premium from the subsequent year plus the added amount because I had a crash. Rarely do insurance companies make losses. Most years I hear them quoted as making millions in profits.

dr.fuzzenstein

carzony wrote: »

Sadly you will also have people who say feck it and decide to drive without insurance. My neighbour has a 00 passat and he was telling me a few weeks ago that he couldnt even get a quote from anywhere with the car he's driving. I can't be sure but I reckon he has no insurance the last few weeks as the cert in the window is out of date.

In one way I don't blame people for it though. My own car is acting up and if it can't be fixed the only thing I could afford would be at most a 00 - 02 car. Still can't believe the insurance industry has gotten away with this new rule.

Either without insurance, lie about the details or just print a phony disc, but I'm considering going back to what I did in the 90's. Buying a car in Germany, registering it at my German address and drive it over here. Do that until I get stopped (took a good few years last time), then sell it, go back and buy another. That way I can also drive an interesting car that Irish insurers wouldn't touch with a bargepole at a fraction of the price.
Illegal? What can you do if you're practically forced to do it. 10 years old is nothing for a car, to have an arbitrary limit forced on us can't be right, so fcuk 'em sideways up the arse with a broken bottle.

The thing is, the cars are not the risk. The dodgy people will just move on to newer cars, drive without insurance or have a foreign reg. This will not make things better. But I think insurers are currently playing a game of chicken with the government. They seem to say "we'll keep this up until you do something" and the government playing playing 'tick and ignorant' and not blinking.
This will eventually come to a head when premiums reach over €1.5k for regular insurance of a regular car and a multitude of that for anything that isn't a 1 liter Yaris. I'm betting the insurers will simply keep cranking it up year on year and the government will wring their hands and proclaim sympathy without ever doing anything. This cannot end well. What is to be done if, say, 20% of us can't even get insurance, or not under €2k? It simply cannot continue, but how can motorists band together, walk up to their local TD and squeeze his nuts until tears run down his chubby cheek and we say "we'll squeeze a little harder every month until you do something. if you don't, we'll vote you out and vote someone else in. if he doesn't do something, we'll kick him out and so on, so hop to it! chop, chop, remember, we pay your wages"

Liam McPoyle

rb25 wrote: »

Insurance companies (car/health/house) are in the business of risk. But rarely do they seem to acknowledge that they don't actually take any risk in insuring people. Because if I have a crash this year they hike my premium next year and take back whatever they paid out to me for repairs the previous year. The majority of people don't crash. So not only do they have my premium paid for the year I had the crash they then have my renewed premium from the subsequent year plus the added amount because I had a crash. Rarely do insurance companies make losses. Most years I hear them quoted as making millions in profits.

What about you crashing into someone, the driver of the other car ends up in a wheel chair for life or worse? How much will that cost?

I saw a claim in a previous job which involved a driver crashing into an accident that had already happened and two people that were on the scene ended up being killed.

At the point i saw it the company had paid out €1,300,000 and the claim was still open.

I've posted in two separate threads on here in the last two days with details of the underwriting losses made from 2009 to 2013.

With the exception of 2012 insurance companies made losses on their motor insurance of tens of millions of euros.

You are completely and utterly wrong in what you are saying.

carzony

The way things are lads maybe it's time to go back to the ol mopeds I remember flying around when I was younger.. Imagine all the decent cars that will end up in the scrapyard. They can talk about saving the planet and being eco-friendly all they like but with policies like this you know it's all bull****...

dr.fuzzenstein

carzony wrote: »

The way things are lads maybe it's time to go back to the ol mopeds I remember flying around when I was younger.. Imagine all the decent cars that will end up in the scrapyard. They can talk about saving the planet and being eco-friendly all they like but with policies like this you know it's all bull****...

If we all did that, insurance for your moped will simply go up to €1k per year.

rb25

Business Cat wrote: »

What about you crashing into someone, the driver of the other car ends up in a wheel chair for life or worse? How much will that cost?

I saw a claim in a previous job which involved a driver crashing into an accident that had already happened and two people that were on the scene ended up being killed.

At the point i saw it the company had paid out €1,300,000 and the claim was still open.

I've posted in two separate threads on here in the last two days with details of the underwriting losses made from 2009 to 2013.

With the exception of 2012 insurance companies made losses on their motor insurance of tens of millions of euros.

You are completely and utterly wrong in what you are saying.

Somebody on the internet told me I'm completely and utterly wrong again. Big deal. I've no sympathy for insurance companies. That's the business they decided to get into. If they can't hack the losses get out of the business. In my business if I make losses I cannot and won't be able to continue.

carzony

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Either without insurance, lie about the details or just print a phony disc, but I'm considering going back to what I did in the 90's. Buying a car in Germany, registering it at my German address and drive it over here. Do that until I get stopped (took a good few years last time), then sell it, go back and buy another. That way I can also drive an interesting car that Irish insurers wouldn't touch with a bargepole at a fraction of the price.

I just feel sorry for people starting out driving. Imagine 12 lessons, cost of driving test, cost of a car that will now have to be atleast 03 - 04, and a huge insurance increase on top of that. I thought it was expensive when I started but nothing compared to what it is today.

I really wouldnt blame a person for chancing it and having no insurance considering the struggle many people will have to face. If it was me i'd honestly tell a guard/judge the truth even though it'd probably not do me any favours. Increasing insurance policies is one thing but refusing insurance on a perfectly good car and then giving everyone a stupid excuse like ''more likely to be involved in a crash'' and expecting people to buy that :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Renegade Mechanic

Some people are being quoted up to 3 grand. FFS, that was what I was paying at 17, but I didn't exactly have a family to feed..

If someone can't afford 3k to insure a car, they're obviously not going to afford the 3k or so it would take to get a decent car within the years that are "safe". There's no point in spending a grand on an 03 ****box, then another grand on an 04 one etc..

carzony

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

Some people are being quoted up to 3 grand. FFS, that was what I was paying at 17, but I didn't exactly have a family to feed..

If someone can't afford 3k to insure a car, they're obviously not going to afford the 3k or so it would take to get a decent car within the years that are "safe". There's no point in spending a grand on an 03 ****box, then another grand on an 04 one etc..

A rule for many young drivers was to buy cheap cars for the first few years to lower the insurance and then splash out on a decent car when your NCB has built up. It's exactly what I did. When I started a few years ago I paid 2700 insurance on a £650 1997 opel corsa:o After that I just bought very cheap ford focus that done the job for me.

Then when the insurance finally went down I was able to spend more money on a decent car.

When I say decent I mean a cool car Add in all the extra costs now and many people will just have no chance,

SCOOP 64

lazeedaisy wrote: »

I had heard this, and was dreading my renewal, as my car is now 15 years old.

There was no difference in last years insurance for me,

Who are you insured with ?
I have a 1998 Astra, insurance up on 17th feb with 123.ie, will be interesting to see quote. been in the family for 12 yrs ,would not want to let it go !

johndaman66

Could someone tell me with certainty the age of cars that this is applicable to (I appreciate that all companies are not enforcing it yet anyway)? I have heard 10/ 12/ 15 years old and maybe a few other figures as well even. ..Perhaps it is the case that it differs from one company to the next?


I acknowledge too that for companies not enforcing the age limit there is a general tendancy to load the premium on 'older' cars. I being 34 years old and driving for the last 14 years with a full ncb was just getting a few quotes online on a 10 year old 1.6 litre petrol mundane family wagon and for the most part thy seem to circa €800 - €950 for TPF&T. Generally circa double of what I paid last year

newacc2015

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Either without insurance, lie about the details or just print a phony disc, but I'm considering going back to what I did in the 90's. Buying a car in Germany, registering it at my German address and drive it over here. Do that until I get stopped (took a good few years last time), then sell it, go back and buy another. That way I can also drive an interesting car that Irish insurers wouldn't touch with a bargepole at a fraction of the price.
Illegal? What can you do if you're practically forced to do it. 10 years old is nothing for a car, to have an arbitrary limit forced on us can't be right, so fcuk 'em sideways up the arse with a broken bottle.

Driving without insurance is a criminal offence in Ireland. When you are caught you will get a massive fine, banned from driving for 2 years and it will be pretty difficult to get insurance again. Insurance is "too expensive" is BS excuse and the judge will throw the book at you

Revenue monitor all cars entering the country and have several agents whose only job is interview people like you. Who think it will acceptable to evade Irish VRT and motor tax. Revenue in 2016 is nothing like Revenue a few years again.

To Elland Back

rb25 wrote: »

I've no sympathy for insurance companies. That's the business they decided to get into. If they can't hack the losses get out of the business.

That's what is happening. Some insurers who have tried to come in and offer cheap (below cost) premiums have either gone bust or left Ireland realising our market is a basket case. None of that benefits motorists.

Jesus.

newacc2015 wrote: »

Driving without insurance is a criminal offence in Ireland. When you are caught you will get a massive fine, banned from driving for 2 years and it will be pretty difficult to get insurance again. Insurance is "too expensive" is BS excuse and the judge will throw the book at you. Revenue monitor all cars entering the country and have several agents whose only job is interview people like you. Who think it will acceptable to evade Irish VRT and motor tax. Revenue in 2016 is nothing like Revenue a few years again.

You're missing the point. Its about what's just and unjust. People generally are reasonable and will pay their dues. They will put up with so much. But when they're blatantly being screwed they say enough is enough. How many people now drive without tax because of the punitive system we have here? Are the revenue actually making any more money than if they had a reasonable rate and therefore high compliance?

How far would you be willing get fecked over before standing up and saying this isn't right? Insurance for 2k? 3k? 5k a year?

Its amazing there's still some people defending them

dr.fuzzenstein

newacc2015 wrote: »

Driving without insurance is a criminal offence in Ireland. When you are caught you will get a massive fine, banned from driving for 2 years and it will be pretty difficult to get insurance again. Insurance is "too expensive" is BS excuse and the judge will throw the book at you

Revenue monitor all cars entering the country and have several agents whose only job is interview people like you. Who think it will acceptable to evade Irish VRT and motor tax. Revenue in 2016 is nothing like Revenue a few years again.

I'm not just talking about myself, so far I'm managing OK and my insurance is not too bad. But this isn't just about me or you, a lot of people are already struggling, but we sure like to get the boot into the less well off in this country. Struggling? We'll soon fix that, here, have some more taxes and increased prices, we'll soon have you totally destroyed and we won't rest till you are, you bastard.
For a lot of people an insurance bill of +€1k or more will just not be an option, they can't afford a new car, they don't have a grand stuck down the back of a sofa, I know, in Ireland we like to say "what, poor people? Fcuk them! Who cares? Surely everyone has €20k for a car, 500 for tax, a grand for insurance and enough change left over for a night out, a weekend in Paris and a fortnight in Lanzarote and if they don't they can go fcuk themselves, as long as I'm OK".
Simply jacking the price of insurance up and up and up won't have a good outcome. Something will have to be done. But since the state is bought off or intimidated by interests from the legal system who don't like their soup getting pissed in, they won't do a thing. All those €15-20k a pop claims for sore neck sure provide a lot of steam for the gravy train.
This website tells us that there are no statistics available about whiplash claims in Ireland:
http://www.injury-compensation-ireland.com/whiplash-injury-compensation-ireland/

But it mentions 14000 claims for whiplash, if we say the average payout is €15k, that would make €210000000! Since this is talking about the injuries board, this may only be the tip of the iceberg because the majority of cases are settled and will never go to the injuries board or court.

Which of course is great if you're the one cashing in, because the Eskimo rule is, if you have discovered a good fishing hole, tell no one about it.
So they are all quietly cashing in, keeping their cards close to the chest and letting their cousin the TD know that if he steps on their toes, they still have all those files on him from that case with the half naked lady (or was it a lady?) from 10 years ago and he wouldn't want those accidentally left on the copier with scan and email function, now would he? Besides, it's such a wonderful arrangement, they cash in, he gets his envelope, everyone is happy. I can all but guarantee that is the case, just look at Ireland's legal system, it's geared towards people with money and if you want your right, you can have it, you just have to pay a few grand a day for a team of solicitors and barristers, sure doesn't everyone have a few extra k in their vault? In Ireland no one is poor, or at least no one that matters...

Jesus.

Well said Doc

Ardent

Checking the comparison websites, the quotes I'm getting are double what I paid last year. Is this purely down to the age of my car (2006) or have there been other recent changes in the insurance industry? ?

Renegade Mechanic

Ardent wrote: »

Checking the comparison websites, the quotes I'm getting are double what I paid last year. Is this purely down to the age of my car (2006) or have there been other recent changes in the insurance industry? ?

I cannot offer an informed reply, so I'll offer a sneery one instead. The poor are too poor to volunteer to be ripped off, so they're being forced into it legally. You may apply this answer to more situations than car insurance.

PurvesGrundy

This is all happening under the watch of the Labour Party, which is another reason to push them towards oblivion in the next election.

Lellostag

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I'm not just talking about myself, so far I'm managing OK and my insurance is not too bad. But this isn't just about me or you, a lot of people are already struggling, but we sure like to get the boot into the less well off in this country. Struggling? We'll soon fix that, here, have some more taxes and increased prices, we'll soon have you totally destroyed and we won't rest till you are, you bastard.
For a lot of people an insurance bill of +€1k or more will just not be an option, they can't afford a new car, they don't have a grand stuck down the back of a sofa, I know, in Ireland we like to say "what, poor people? Fcuk them! Who cares? Surely everyone has €20k for a car, 500 for tax, a grand for insurance and enough change left over for a night out, a weekend in Paris and a fortnight in Lanzarote and if they don't they can go fcuk themselves, as long as I'm OK".
Simply jacking the price of insurance up and up and up won't have a good outcome. Something will have to be done. But since the state is bought off or intimidated by interests from the legal system who don't like their soup getting pissed in, they won't do a thing. All those €15-20k a pop claims for sore neck sure provide a lot of steam for the gravy train.
This website tells us that there are no statistics available about whiplash claims in Ireland:
http://www.injury-compensation-ireland.com/whiplash-injury-compensation-ireland/

But it mentions 14000 claims for whiplash, if we say the average payout is €15k, that would make €210000000! Since this is talking about the injuries board, this may only be the tip of the iceberg because the majority of cases are settled and will never go to the injuries board or court.

Which of course is great if you're the one cashing in, because the Eskimo rule is, if you have discovered a good fishing hole, tell no one about it.
So they are all quietly cashing in, keeping their cards close to the chest and letting their cousin the TD know that if he steps on their toes, they still have all those files on him from that case with the half naked lady (or was it a lady?) from 10 years ago and he wouldn't want those accidentally left on the copier with scan and email function, now would he? Besides, it's such a wonderful arrangement, they cash in, he gets his envelope, everyone is happy. I can all but guarantee that is the case, just look at Ireland's legal system, it's geared towards people with money and if you want your right, you can have it, you just have to pay a few grand a day for a team of solicitors and barristers, sure doesn't everyone have a few extra k in their vault? In Ireland no one is poor, or at least no one that matters...

Many good points for sure. A quality rant if there ever was one!

newacc2015

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I'm not just talking about myself, so far I'm managing OK and my insurance is not too bad. But this isn't just about me or you, a lot of people are already struggling, but we sure like to get the boot into the less well off in this country. Struggling? We'll soon fix that, here, have some more taxes and increased prices, we'll soon have you totally destroyed and we won't rest till you are, you bastard.
For a lot of people an insurance bill of +€1k or more will just not be an option, they can't afford a new car, they don't have a grand stuck down the back of a sofa, I know, in Ireland we like to say "what, poor people? Fcuk them! Who cares? Surely everyone has €20k for a car, 500 for tax, a grand for insurance and enough change left over for a night out, a weekend in Paris and a fortnight in Lanzarote and if they don't they can go fcuk themselves, as long as I'm OK".
Simply jacking the price of insurance up and up and up won't have a good outcome. Something will have to be done. But since the state is bought off or intimidated by interests from the legal system who don't like their soup getting pissed in, they won't do a thing. All those €15-20k a pop claims for sore neck sure provide a lot of steam for the gravy train.
This website tells us that there are no statistics available about whiplash claims in Ireland:
http://www.injury-compensation-ireland.com/whiplash-injury-compensation-ireland/

But it mentions 14000 claims for whiplash, if we say the average payout is €15k, that would make €210000000! Since this is talking about the injuries board, this may only be the tip of the iceberg because the majority of cases are settled and will never go to the injuries board or court.

Which of course is great if you're the one cashing in, because the Eskimo rule is, if you have discovered a good fishing hole, tell no one about it.
So they are all quietly cashing in, keeping their cards close to the chest and letting their cousin the TD know that if he steps on their toes, they still have all those files on him from that case with the half naked lady (or was it a lady?) from 10 years ago and he wouldn't want those accidentally left on the copier with scan and email function, now would he? Besides, it's such a wonderful arrangement, they cash in, he gets his envelope, everyone is happy. I can all but guarantee that is the case, just look at Ireland's legal system, it's geared towards people with money and if you want your right, you can have it, you just have to pay a few grand a day for a team of solicitors and barristers, sure doesn't everyone have a few extra k in their vault? In Ireland no one is poor, or at least no one that matters...

If insurance companies cant make profit. Who will provide insurance? Every insurance company is losing vasts amount of money( something which you cant seem to understand looking at your various posts in the past). If insurance is so profitable in Ireland, why has FBD share price more than halved in the last year? Why has RSA Ireland been a disaster for the RSA group. As Irish premiums are too cheap and claims are too high. Premiums have to rise, as they are half the price of what they were relative to over a decade ago. That is not sustainable. What has tax and class got to do with the insurance industry?

Look at the FBD annual report. They state between 2013 and 2014 their claim compensation was up almost 30%, while they only increase premiums between 4-7%. Where is the price gouging there? If all the loss making insurance companies leave the market. Premiums will be higher, as there will be less competition. Do you agree with that?
Payoffs are cheaper than going to court. If you go to court, it is extremely expensive. You have to pay solicitor and barrister fees, court fees etc. It is cheaper to just cut a cheque. Insurance companies are business, if there was a cheaper option to payouts like fighting it in court. Of course they would do that.

What is the alternative to payouts? Go to court and increase premiums further as insurance companies legal fees have sky rocketed. You are literally saying the insurance and legal industry is bad. But not saying anything that can be done about it. You appear to have very little solid knowledge about the insurance industry and the state it currently is in. Such as the real reason why prices has spiked, as the central bank is warning insurances not to eat into their reserves further aka stop continuing to loss money
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/central-bank-told-insurers-to-raise-their-prices-to-cover-the-cost-of-claims-34348339.html

Jesus.

Newacc, why the loading of older cars? What's the point of the NCT so?

I wouldn't be surprised if the car dealerships were in on this to force people into new cars. You might think that sounds far fetched but this Country is built on such behind closed doors alliances.

cravings

recently got insured on a new policy on a 1995 car, 2 adults in their late 30s with long term clean licenses.. not much usable ncb, €550 i think. (patrona via Britton insurance).

it can still be done.. you just have to put the time into the phone calls and hussle. it is getting harder though.. and i completely agree that it feels like a kick in the teeth when your car has been well looked after, runs well, passes the national safety test.. to then be told it's not valid due to its age and nothing else about it.