Insuring BMW 3 with <1 year experience

mac.book

Hi guys,

I got my learner's permit last week, I'm going to take the necessary lessons over next 6 months and hopefully get full license early next year. Until then I will not own any car.

At some stage before summer next year I'm hoping to purchase a BMW 3 series 2.0 litre engine, year 2007 - 2009.

I expect to spend €4K - €7K on the car. I'll be 21 next year and I know insuring a 2 litre BMW especially at this age will not be cost effective base on my lack of driving experience.

However, I'm willing to consider it. Is there any idea what kind of price range I might be quoted? I'm hoping between €4K - €6K for first year, is it possible it will be much more than that? I might also include my dad in the policy who has over 17 years experience driving with only 1 claim made if that makes any significant difference. However I do not live with my parents, not sure how that works out.

Henry Ford III

Ask a Broker?

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

z6vm1dobfnca3x

I bought a BMW 320D M-Sport Coupé (E46) when I was 19, although I had my full licence since I was 17.

I paid €1,100 fully comp with FBD.

Just make sure you buy a diesel or you'll be robbed!

mac.book

Alyssa Sticky Helmet wrote: »

I bought a BMW 320D M-Sport Coupé (E46) when I was 19, although I had my full licence since I was 17.

I paid €1,100 fully comp with FBD.

Just make sure you buy a diesel or you'll be robbed!

Cheers, I'll be going with the 320 Diesel for sure. But this at least gives me hope that with a decent broker I should find something within my limit of €6K next year.

z6vm1dobfnca3x

mac.book wrote: »

Cheers, I'll be going with the 320 Diesel for sure. But this at least gives me hope that with a decent broker I should find something within my limit of €6K next year.

€6K is plenty!

Best of luck with it,
Hugo

kirving

You're planning on spending between 4 and 6k on just the insurance for the year?! It'll be expensive, but not that bad.

You'd be insane to spend that kind of money for the first year on an 8-10 year old BMW when you could insure some very decent cars for half that - if indeed the 320d is that expensive.

The Bishop Basher

You could try putting your details in to an online quote tool as they would look in a years time but it'll probably just tell you to call them...

Would also be worth doing an ignition course or similar to get the cost down a bit more...

Either way €6k should be more then enough...

What a sad state of affairs for motor enthusiasts in Ireland when a 2L Diesel attracts this kind of premium..

People in Ireland still think anything over a 1.4 is a supercar, bless em..

It's just unfortunate that the insurance companies, who should make it their business to know better, follow suit..

newacc2015

Swanner wrote: »

What a sad state of affairs for motor enthusiasts in Ireland when a 2L Diesel attracts this kind of premium..

People in Ireland still think anything over a 1.4 is a supercar, bless em..

It's just unfortunate that the insurance companies, who should make it their business to know better, follow suit..

Insurance is not witchcraft and voodoo. There are tons of staff members in insurance companies looking at factors which affect risk. Someone driving a 2L car is more risky to hold as a customer than a person who drives a 1.4L. They havent made this up, someone has crunched the numbers on this.

No one is making you drive a 2L car. If you want to drive one, you should pay the extra risk for driving one

The Bishop Basher

newacc2015 wrote: »

Someone driving a 2L car is more risky to hold as a customer than a person who drives a 1.4L. They havent made this up, someone has crunched the numbers on this.

By €5 or €6 grand ? You think the jump in risk is that great ?

Fair enough so. If it's not voodoo, please share with us the data and method they use to attain that figure ? Please show us how a figure of €5k or €6k is calculated and arrived at and how it directly relates to the increase in risk..

Or are you just blindly accepting the word of a company who's sole purpose in life is to extract as much cash from your pocket as your willing to allow on the basis of the fact that they've told you it's ok because, wait for it, they have "someone crunching the numbers ?"

If it's the former i'm all ears...

If it's the latter, well, I have a whole team of people "crunching numbers" and some excellent investment opportunities i'd love you to take a look at.. :pac:

Henry Ford III

Swanner wrote: »

By €5 or €6 grand ? You think the jump in risk is that great ?

Fair enough so. If it's not voodoo, please share with us the data and method they use to attain that figure ? Please show us how a figure of €5k or €6k is calculated and arrived at and how it directly relates to the increase in risk..

Or are you just blindly accepting the word of a company who's sole purpose in life is to extract as much cash from your pocket as your willing to allow on the basis of the fact that they've told you it's ok because, wait for it, they have "someone crunching the numbers ?"

If it's the former i'm all ears...

If it's the latter, well, I have a whole team of people "crunching numbers" and some excellent investment opportunities i'd love you to take a look at.. :pac:

Premium calculations and the data that goes into calculating them aren't public.

The market is however competitive (I haggled a 15+% reduction on a motor premium this week). So if the higher risk profiles had high profit levels attaching there'd be major competition and discounting.

The Bishop Basher

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Premium calculations and the data that goes into calculating them aren't public.

Exactly.

It's complete voodoo and it suits the industry to keep it that way.

kirving

AXA Operaing Margin: 6.87%
Aviva Operating margin: 4.94%
Zurich Operating margin: 6.86%

http://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/financials?s=AXA:MIL
http://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/financials?s=AV.:LSE
http://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/financials?s=ZURN:VTX

Admittedly the above aren’t broken down by country, but despite what people think, insurance companies aren’t making ridiculous profits. If they were making 10, 20, 30% profits, it would mean that they could be easily undercut by the competition and go out of business.
Insurance companies like making steady, predictable profits, even if it means that they’re relatively low compared to other industries.

A 160+ bhp car with no driving or insurance history to speak of is asking for a high premium. It’s certainly not a fast car, but when you see some guy who’s wrapped his car around a tree in Donegal, it’s very rarely a Yaris.

Henry Ford III

Swanner wrote: »

Exactly.

It's complete voodoo and it suits the industry to keep it that way.

It'd make no difference if we knew every detail. Most people wouldn't be able make any sense of the data.

How businesses price products is of no consequence or concern to Joe Public - why should motor insurance be any different?

The Bishop Basher

Henry Ford III wrote: »

How businesses price products is of no consequence or concern to Joe Public - why should motor insurance be any different?

Because for many, a car is a necessity, not a luxury.

And insurance is mandatory..

Henry Ford III

Swanner wrote: »

Because for many, a car is a necessity, not a luxury.

And insurance is mandatory..

Still doesn't necessitate disclosure of premium calculations.

I suspect that the real issue is cost. Motor Insurance isn't cheap. The main reason for this without any shadow of doubt is the cost of claims allied to outrageous legal fees.

If these were brought into line premiums would tumble.

The Bishop Basher

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Still doesn't necessitate disclosure of premium calculations.

It certainly puts a higher onus on both the Government and the Industry to make it affordable. And if they can't do that, which appears to be the case for many, then they need to be transparent as to to the reasons why..

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I suspect that the real issue is cost. Motor Insurance isn't cheap. The main reason for this without any shadow of doubt is the cost of claims allied to outrageous legal fees.

If these were brought into line premiums would tumble.

Yet were told the cost of claims is decreasing year on year...

But I agree, the legal costs are one issue, as is our compo culture.

As is the fact that we pick up the tab for companies that go to the wall.

I suppose we'd end up paying one way or another regardless but it would be better shared and less painful for all if it was out of general taxation.

But it's also entirely possible the companies themselves are using Ireland to maximise profit while gaining market share elsewhere with lower premia.

Why ? Because they can..

And it's not like every other service provider and retailer isn't doing it to be fair..

Anyway, we're off topic here but in short, I agree.

mac.book

Kevin Irving wrote: »

You're planning on spending between 4 and 6k on just the insurance for the year?! It'll be expensive, but not that bad.

You'd be insane to spend that kind of money for the first year on an 8-10 year old BMW when you could insure some very decent cars for half that - if indeed the 320d is that expensive.

I know it seems like an overkill just to drive a BMW. Are there any lower risk cars in particular you can recommend?

newacc2015

Swanner wrote: »

Because for many, a car is a necessity, not a luxury.

And insurance is mandatory..

So a 2L BMW is a now a necessity? A car is a necessity for some, but if it a necessity I dont think they will moaning about how insuring a 2L is x amount more than insuring a 1.4L

True, but driving a 2L car isnt when there is plenty of cheaper alternatives. I dont think you will find many people who agree with your notion that a 2L car is a necessity

Since you think insurers are price gouging higher litre cars without a corresponding increase in risk. Why arent they under cutting one another? If high engine sized cars dont have much risk and high prices, why isnt at least one company exploiting that massive untapped market ? Because it doesnt exist

The Bishop Basher

newacc2015 wrote: »

So a 2L BMW is a now a necessity?

No of course not.

Why ?

Did someone suggested it was

z6vm1dobfnca3x

Wait, OP, you're budgeting to spend €6k on insurance! I misread your post and thought the €6k was for the car!!!

First of all, it will not be €6k for insurance. I reckon you might get a quote for between €1500 - €2000.

And second of all, if you're willing to spend €6k on insurance, you must be absolutely mental or absolutely rich. Or both!

As I already mentioned, I was insured on my E46 for €1,100 for the year with FBD (fully comp) when I was 19. I'm 23 now and still paying roughly the same. Unless you have 11 penalty points, I can't see why you think you need €6k!!!

Just go onto a few insurance co. websites now and get some instant online quotes to give yourself an idea of what you'll pay. The prices vary massively!

Peace,
Hugo.

dr.fuzzenstein

newacc2015 wrote: »

Insurance is not witchcraft and voodoo. There are tons of staff members in insurance companies looking at factors which affect risk. Someone driving a 2L car is more risky to hold as a customer than a person who drives a 1.4L. They havent made this up, someone has crunched the numbers on this.

No one is making you drive a 2L car. If you want to drive one, you should pay the extra risk for driving one

Nonsense, it's the Irish attitude of "Ah Jaysis, 'tis a 2 liter, Lord bless us and save us, 'tis fierrce fasht, so 'tis!"

grogi

Swanner wrote: »

Because for many, a car is a necessity, not a luxury.

And insurance is mandatory..

That's why we have competition. To make the prices as cheap as possible. What the government just needs to do is make sure there is no cartel between the companies.

grogi

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Nonsense, it's the Irish attitude of "Ah Jaysis, 'tis a 2 liter, Lord bless us and save us, 'tis fierrce fasht, so 'tis!"

It is not a direct increase in risk (faster cars are not generally more dangerous, maybe even the opposite) - but rather indirect.

A person with less risky road habbits is less keen on getting a higher performance car. They cost more and who gets cars like that is usually who intend on using those ponies...

And that is your correlation: the more gutsy car, the more thrill-seeking driver, the bigger the risk.