Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Car insurance for >15 year old cars

Options
1356730

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Oooh you'll be on the naughty step with me if you keep asking reasonable questions Wibbs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭Bananaleaf


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/aig-urges-ban-on-whiplash-claims-to-cut-premiums-1.2548667%3Fmode%3Damp

    The insurance market is heavily driven by claims costs.

    If we are paying up to 500% higher for compensation claims than our EU counterparts then is it not logical that the insurance will cost more?

    You simply cannot compare the two markets.

    Even the UK which is similarly priced to over here pay substantially less for claims settlements.
    That's the thing. They need to start camping payouts amd have system. Judges are a lot to blame for this bull.
    A tip in carpark. There are not even a scratch on car. 3 people whiplash and all take away 15k each without needing to prove anything.

    Cap payouts.
    Make insurance fraud very heavy criminal offence.

    Done.

    I'm not really sure of what I'm saying really, but I want to throw it out there anyway in case there is someone here better able to explain this.

    Is it the car companies who pay out when there is a medical claim? Or are they simply paying out for the cost of the car?

    I'm pretty sure I heard a debate on this where it was outlined that the car insurance companies don't pay the costs of medical claims. I don't know who does if that is true - maybe someone here can confirm/correct?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Which is all fine and dandy and I can understand that, but how can quotes for the exact same driver with the exact same car and the exact same cover differ so wildly? Double sometimes triple isn't that unusual. And how can a guy with full licence, NCB in his mid thirties driving a Saab be the same "risk" as a Porsche driver in his fifties(I double the risk apparently). Never mind the difference an extra 12 months on a reg plate can make. Insurable on the 31st of Dec, uninsurable on the 1st of Jan. How do compensation claims plug into that then?

    In simplistic terms, every insurer will have different risk appetites at a given time.

    They may have had bad experience with a particular car type and as a result price it to not get the business.

    In relation to the age of vehicle, I agree, it doesn't make much sense to me either however the logic behind it (as far as I can see) is that older vehicles have been involved in more accidents than newer vehicles and therefore a blanket view is taken with all vehicles over a certain age.

    Its very much a case of using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut but the fact of the matter is that its simply not possible to underwrite every single vehicle individually.

    I review and underwrite between 70 and 100 policies a week between home and motor as part of my job. So annually it probably averages at around 4000 individual policies. Im on the higher end of weekly capacity too. The company I work for has iirc something in the region of 350,000 individual policies and would do well over 2,000,000 quotes a year.

    It's not an ideal system but its what we have at the moment. I am confident that we have reached the top of the market in terms of pricing and that we will see a reduction over the next 12 to 24 months.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    Bananaleaf wrote: »
    I'm not really sure of what I'm saying really, but I want to throw it out there anyway in case there is someone here better able to explain this.

    Is it the car companies who pay out when there is a medical claim? Or are they simply paying out for the cost of the car?

    I'm pretty sure I heard a debate on this where it was outlined that the car insurance companies don't pay the costs of medical claims. I don't know who does if that is true - maybe someone here can confirm/correct?

    If I crash into you and you have injuries then my insurer will be liable to pay all your medical expenses.

    If I crash my car and nobody else is involved my insurer will not pay my medical bills. Some insurers do give a limited amount of expenses coverage to the driver / policy holder that's generally capped at around €1000.

    A recent ruling also has made insurers liable for any social welfare payments made to claimants ie if you claim a sickness benefit from the social welfare department they will in turn claim it back from the insurer.

    Its another cost that insurers have been saddled with yet it has gotten no coverage whatsoever.

    They are all conmen though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/aig-urges-ban-on-whiplash-claims-to-cut-premiums-1.2548667%3Fmode%3Damp

    The insurance market is heavily driven by claims costs.

    If we are paying up to 500% higher for compensation claims than our EU counterparts then is it not logical that the insurance will cost more?

    You simply cannot compare the two markets.

    Even the UK which is similarly priced to over here pay substantially less for claims settlements.

    What else would an insurance market be driven by, other than claims cost? Claims cost dictates what premiums should be. The point being made is that a modest increase in number of claims is driving an unacceptable increase of 30% to 50% in premiums.

    And where are you getting your figure for 500% from?

    Between 2014 and 2015 the number of claims actually fell, from 12420 to 11734. The total value of these claims fell from €281.21m in 2014 to €268.45m in 2015. source PIAB 2015

    Yet premiums rocketed in that time frame. Why was that?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    What else would an insurance market be driven by, other than claims cost? Claims cost dictates what premiums should be. The point being made is that a modest increase in number of claims is driving an unacceptable increase of 30% to 50% in premiums.

    And where are you getting your figure for 500% from?

    Between 2014 and 2015 the number of claims actually fell, from 12420 to 11734. The total value of these claims fell from €281.21m in 2014 to €268.45m in 2015. source PIAB 2015

    Yet premiums rocketed in that time frame. Why was that?

    Average cost of whiplash in Ireland €15000.

    Average cost of whiplash in Germany €2000.


    500%+ difference.

    The figures quoted above are from PIAB only.

    Do you think they deal with every insurance claim there is?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Average cost of whiplash in Ireland €15000.

    Average cost of whiplash in Germany €2000.


    500%+ difference.

    The figures quoted above are from PIAB only.

    Do you think they deal with every insurance claim there is?

    Where did you get the figures was what i was asking. A source. I've been looking for definitive ones but can only find figures from insurance companies themselves ( heavily nuanced)



    Anyway, cherry picking individual injuries is pointless. whats of value is the total cost/average cost of claims in the market.

    As regards PIAB, are you suggesting a sufficiently small percentage of cases go through the PIAB to render their figures irrelevant?

    edit: According to this Report to the government Nov 2016 Page 41:
    . IBEC highlighted the disparity in
    whiplash awards offered in Ireland vis a vis mainland Europe. In this injury
    category alone, the disparity is in the region of 300%.

    So if the german figure is to be believed, then the payout in Ireland is €6000, not far off whats typical in the UK, but far removed from your suggestion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Do you think they deal with every insurance claim there is?

    20% are dealt with by PIAB. 10% by the courts.

    70% by the insurance companies themselves.

    Now, are you suggesting that insurance companies pay more in claims they settle themselves and this is somehow the consumers fault?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Average cost of whiplash in Ireland €15000.

    Average cost of whiplash in Germany €2000.


    500%+ difference.

    The figures quoted above are from PIAB only.

    Do you think they deal with every insurance claim there is?

    Every single time.

    Every single time somebody mentions whiplash they mention Germany. Some people say they get €500. Some say they get €2000. Some say they get a kick in the hole and told to walk it off.

    And every single time it's apples and oranges.

    What is the total cost of the injury in Germany- do the companies pay for the treatment or is that picked up by the taxpayer via a functioning public health system?

    I'd love to see the total cost of a full treatment program in Ireland.

    Time off work to attend appointments. (Leisure time or work time, I didn't ask to be run into, my time is precious)
    Mileage. ( i did not fvcking ask to be run into, I will not be out of pocket because somebody else was too ignorant not to run into other people)
    The actual cost of the treatment... ever price a repair job at an "insurer approved" crash repair place? Picture the same markup on the doctor/physio/etc costs.

    So you get compensation for not being able to play your golf or whatever for a few weeks, or get a decent nights sleep.
    Add on the insurer approved treatment costs and your own expenses for attending (it's not like you asked for some ignoramus to ram you from behind)...
    What does that all add up to it wonder?

    Don't even fvcking suggest that the public health system here could absorb these extra out patients.


    And THEN, after getting your €500, a kick in the hole, 2 paracetamol and a backrub.... then you'll find that some insurers won't quote you because you have been involved in an accident/loss even though you weren't at fault. Others may quote you but will load you for having claimed off somebody else's insurance. How much...hmmmm ...would €500 sound about right?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,142 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Its very much a case of using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut but the fact of the matter is that its simply not possible to underwrite every single vehicle individually.
    Why not? Or at least have some bloody cop on with each client. That a teacher in his mid 30's driving a Saab can be seen as the same risk as a Porsche 911 turbo driver in his 50's is way beyond a difficultly with underwriting every single vehicle individually. Oddly the 911 is over ten years old. Hmmm…. Its seems only some cars are penalised. And companies are all too quick to underwrite individually when and where it suits.
    It's not an ideal system but its what we have at the moment. I am confident that we have reached the top of the market in terms of pricing and that we will see a reduction over the next 12 to 24 months.
    Well that's alright then. I'll put my car up on blocks this year and try again next year. Oh wait… can't do that either as the pricks will knock my no claims back for being off their books for a year. Rock
    Me
    Hard place.

    And the first person to suggest I change cars will be sent off with a flea in their ear. If they're lucky. When a car four times the power, twice the speed and ten times the price and the same age is half the cost to insure? Get off the stage.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    There are literally not enough hours in the day to rate each proposer/policy individually.

    The guys that are at the coal face ie in call centres etc are not underwriters and do not have the required skills or experience to rate a policy outside of the predetermined acceptance criteria.

    As I said above, having a blanket approach is not ideal but unless an insurer is going to pay to employ 100 underwriters for new business and even 50 for existing business then there is nothing that can be done.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,759 ✭✭✭gustafo


    JtByrne wrote: »
    Kennco insurance covered my Golf and its 16 years old.

    Did you get a good price from them?

    I just got my renewal from broker i used for the last few years and it's nearly doubled from last year.
    I paid 520 last year, this year they are looking for 960 for 3rd party fire and theft on a 00 mazda 323.

    Absolutely ridiculous


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 11 JtByrne


    gustafo wrote: »
    Did you get a good price from them?

    I just got my renewal from broker i used for the last few years and it's nearly doubled from last year.
    I paid 520 last year, this year they are looking for 960 for 3rd party fire and theft on a 00 mazda 323.

    Absolutely ridiculous

    It was 770. It's gone up about 50 from last year.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,620 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Every single time.

    Every single time somebody mentions whiplash they mention Germany...(and so son)

    Well, the figures are hard to dispute. Add to that the undoubtedly quite high number who don't actually need medical treatment but simply have a convenient sore neck to cash in to the tune of €15-20k, the "hidden" cost of which you speak in Germany must be to the tune of €13-15k per accident victim, being very conservative with my estimates.
    Also, since the cash payout is much lower, but with a better treatment program available, I would say it discourages spurious claims. If a German gets hit by a car he will claim if he has to, get his settlement and medical treatment if needed. It makes it not very attractive to start your own "crash4cash" business.
    Many people in Ireland will simply have €€ signs in their eyes if someone tips off them at 5 km/h. Pack 5 lads in a clapped out car, 5 in another, stage 5 km/h "crash", hey presto, windfall of at least €150k combined.
    That is money you can't even get from a bank robbery. And unlike a bank robbery, it is utterly consequence free. Get caught, the worst that will happen is "better luck next time, lads", or the judge will award damages anyway, because it's not his money, he's drunk again, insane, demented, well you know, typical circus court judge stuff.
    I keep saying it, if there was snow in Ireland, there would be no skiing. It simply would be unsustainable, if 10 people fell on the piste every day, it would cost millions in compensation every year to keep the place running. The daily pass would have to cost €25032.50.
    I know it drives you bonkers, I don't know why, I just don't get it.
    The figures are the figures are the figures.
    But I do agree with the bad investment thing and insurances being loaded for all sorts of stuff.
    Plus the fact that the Irish legal system is run by leeches, criminals, conmen, thieves and lunatics.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Well, the figures are hard to dispute. Add to that the undoubtedly quite high number who don't actually need medical treatment but simply have a convenient sore neck to cash in to the tune of €15-20k, the "hidden" cost of which you speak in Germany must be to the tune of €13-15k per accident victim, being very conservative with my estimates.
    Also, since the cash payout is much lower, but with a better treatment program available, I would say it discourages spurious claims. If a German gets hit by a car he will claim if he has to, get his settlement and medical treatment if needed. It makes it not very attractive to start your own "crash4cash" business.
    Many people in Ireland will simply have €€ signs in their eyes if someone tips off them at 5 km/h. Pack 5 lads in a clapped out car, 5 in another, stage 5 km/h "crash", hey presto, windfall of at least €150k combined.
    That is money you can't even get from a bank robbery. And unlike a bank robbery, it is utterly consequence free. Get caught, the worst that will happen is "better luck next time, lads", or the judge will award damages anyway, because it's not his money, he's drunk again, insane, demented, well you know, typical circus court judge stuff.
    I keep saying it, if there was snow in Ireland, there would be no skiing. It simply would be unsustainable, if 10 people fell on the piste every day, it would cost millions in compensation every year to keep the place running. The daily pass would have to cost €25032.50.
    I know it drives you bonkers, I don't know why, I just don't get it.
    The figures are the figures are the figures.
    But I do agree with the bad investment thing and insurances being loaded for all sorts of stuff.
    Plus the fact that the Irish legal system is run by leeches, criminals, conmen, thieves and lunatics.

    The apples with oranges figures are very easy to dispute.

    I'm saying the "€500 ja" is an apples with oranges comparison and we do not have the sytems in Ireland to provide the same care for the same cost to the injured party as Germany.

    I'm not saying "give everybody 15-20k".

    BTW - I'd love to hear an insurance exec say "yeah, couldn't play the ol golf/squash at all for 6 months but I got €500... sweet deal or what"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    Well, the figures are hard to dispute. Add to that the undoubtedly quite high number who don't actually need medical treatment but simply have a convenient sore neck to cash in to the tune of €15-20k, the "hidden" cost of which you speak in Germany must be to the tune of €13-15k per accident victim, being very conservative with my estimates.
    Also, since the cash payout is much lower, but with a better treatment program available, I would say it discourages spurious claims. If a German gets hit by a car he will claim if he has to, get his settlement and medical treatment if needed. It makes it not very attractive to start your own "crash4cash" business.
    Many people in Ireland will simply have €€ signs in their eyes if someone tips off them at 5 km/h. Pack 5 lads in a clapped out car, 5 in another, stage 5 km/h "crash", hey presto, windfall of at least €150k combined.
    That is money you can't even get from a bank robbery. And unlike a bank robbery, it is utterly consequence free. Get caught, the worst that will happen is "better luck next time, lads", or the judge will award damages anyway, because it's not his money, he's drunk again, insane, demented, well you know, typical circus court judge stuff.
    I keep saying it, if there was snow in Ireland, there would be no skiing. It simply would be unsustainable, if 10 people fell on the piste every day, it would cost millions in compensation every year to keep the place running. The daily pass would have to cost €25032.50.
    I know it drives you bonkers, I don't know why, I just don't get it.
    The figures are the figures are the figures.
    But I do agree with the bad investment thing and insurances being loaded for all sorts of stuff.
    Plus the fact that the Irish legal system is run by leeches, criminals, conmen, thieves and lunatics.

    Good to see some objectivity in here Doc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Well, the figures are hard to dispute. [cut rant about fraud]

    {Its already been established that fraud adds about 35 - 50 euros to an average policy.}

    -- What figures are those? Your "15-20K" whiplash figure?
    IBEC have already refuted the €15k claim, never mind your new figure of €20k.


    Maybe you are referring to the figures the insurance companies wont release, despite being critical to support the "premium rise because... Fraud. Compo, etc."? (see report i linked to earlier)

    All I.m asking is that people stop pulling figures out of the air. Present something that can be verified.


    Also, you cant just throw these figures around as proof of fraud. Are you suggesting that nobody is genuinely injured in this country?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,205 ✭✭✭cruizer101


    I hate the insurance companies as much as everyone else in this thread (I've a 99 2.0 Honda Accord insurance up in March, not looking forward to it), however all the blame can't go to them.

    Firstly they were allowed get into the position they are in (not enough reserve funds) by previous government letting them.

    The thing you have to remember is most companies aren't ethical, especially when they get bigger, they are machines to make money simple as that. The people who make the high level decisions that affect all our premiums are so far removed from us they don't give a ****. Try remember this when talking to them on the phone, the person you are talking to may well be in the same position as many of us.

    Ultimately what should happen is the government take over car insurance but that won't happen. They should at least ensure details of every claim should be published, there is absolutely no reason that should not be public knowledge to be analysed by whoever wants.
    Also realistically insurance should be based simply on driving experience, car power and weight (not some crazy complicated calculation but a simple system i.e. 20 insurance classes), previous claims and convictions/penalty points. Possibly age but even that I wouldn't be so sure (22 year old driving 5 years is probably better than a newly qualified 40 year old).

    There are two different things at play here
    1 insurance is gone up: This is across the board because of lack of reserves, increased claims etc. Its **** but it is what it is.
    2 Insurance companies are loading and refusing older cars, this is where the real injustice is, there is no logic, people may delude themselves that the insurance companies are misreading the figures, they are not, the actuaries at the top are smarter than the majority of people out there. They know the figures but they also know how to present the figures to say damn near whatever they want.
    I'm not one for conspiracy theories and this is possibly borderline one but they have made a conscious decision to load older cars, because for whatever reason it is in their interest for people to have newer cars, maybe the shareholders in insurance are also the shareholders in car companies, maybe they are being encouraged by the government in order to prop up new car sales making the economy seem better, who knows but they are not doing this because of statistics they are using statistics to justify it.

    Are they to blame, kind of, but as I say an insurance company like most other companies is not an ethical being it is a machine to make money, the government are meant to be ethical hand that guides companies but sadly ours is a driveling fat slob that panders to them.

    I've gone off on a bit of a rant here but just to say do keep posting the insurance you get on older cars it is helpful information to those of us who see no need to jump on the new car bandwagon and get the latest pcp ****e deal and what not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭Bananaleaf


    Wibbs wrote: »
    And the first person to suggest I change cars will be sent off with a flea in their ear. If they're lucky. When a car four times the power, twice the speed and ten times the price and the same age is half the cost to insure? Get off the stage.

    This is the bit that drives me up the wall. Anybody who suggests that clearly can't comprehend the issue.
    who don't actually need medical treatment but simply have a convenient sore neck to cash in to the tune of €15-20k

    It is an outrage that cash is given for medical treatment in these cases. Why can't it be awarded as 'medical credit' for want of a better explanation.

    Not a motor related anecdote here but same principle. I know of someone who had a bad fall a few years back and was awarded a cash figure. He was actually hurt so it wasn't a bogus claim. Nature of the injury meant that he would need surgery immediately and then more surgery a few years down the line. Had the initial surgery. Drank the rest. Social Welfare most of his life. So, when the time comes for the second surgery, his claim money is gone but sure he's no job. So ...... the likes of us will be paying for his second surgery twice.

    I'm not using the thread as an opportunity to have a go at "social welfare scroungers" I'm more pointing out how it makes no sense in my eyes to hand people over this amount of cash.

    As mentioned previously would make whiplash a less inviting option and clearly I have no business experience but I'm wondering - wouldn't this mean that the insurers would get to hold onto the money for longer if it was only being drawn out as needed for medial bills? Say, in a frozen account just full of claims money. Gaining interest. Restocking the pot so to speak. This suggestion is probably an off-the-wall one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,873 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Brian J Pierce Limited
    (01) 667 4985

    Mark O'Grady at BJ Pierce saved me €200 on my 1995. Really helpful


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,142 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    gustafo wrote: »
    I paid 520 last year, this year they are looking for 960 for 3rd party fire and theft on a 00 mazda 323.

    Absolutely ridiculous
    Aye, Though TBH Gustafo I would cry tears of fcuking joy to get a quote even close to the wrong side of a thousand quid. That's how ridiculous it's become. EG I was paying 800, then it doubled last year and now it's 300 quid shy of three bloody grand. For the same driver who is getting older and safer by the year and the same car that is getting older and less valuable* and I'm doing way less milage than I was(I've only done 7000 Kms since 2013). Never mind I've had the thing since '05 so it's more like a well loved family pet at this stage. A scarily economical old thing it has been too. In maintenance it has cost me less in original parts and labour in all that time than the cost of my insurance premium last year. Oh that includes consumables too. Yep. Proof if proof were needed I drive like a nun. :D





    *the insurance has added to the Irish devaluation. The premiums have meant these articular cars are dead in the water value wise. Half the price of the UK and the rest of the EU. If you can sell one. It's not the only model so affected. I personally know of a few British lads that have come over here to buy older cars at a major saving compared to the UK market.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,130 ✭✭✭Surreptitious


    Mine went up 500 euros this year. Nearly killed me to pay it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    cruizer101 wrote: »
    This is across the board because of lack of reserves, increased claims etc. Its **** but it is what it is.

    Its ***** because that is clearly *not* what it is.

    Increased Claims? The evidence suggests that they have not increased to any significant degree. Unless you can provide otherwise?

    Lack of reserves? Insurance companies have left themselves exposed by blowing profits that should have bolstered reserves. Insurance companies increase reserves by declaring them as such and posting a loss to their books. This loss is then balanced by an inward investment - like a convertible bond. Or you can just screw your customers and tell them its due to 'fraud'

    Neither of these reasons is sufficient to explain the 30% - 40% hikes we have witnessed.

    Its profiteering on a captive market.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    Its ***** because that is clearly *not* what it is.

    Increased Claims? The evidence suggests that they have not increased to any significant degree. Unless you can provide otherwise?

    Lack of reserves? Insurance companies have left themselves exposed by blowing profits that should have bolstered reserves. Insurance companies increase reserves by declaring them as such and posting a loss to their books. This loss is then balanced by an inward investment - like a convertible bond. Or you can just screw your customers and tell them its due to 'fraud'

    Neither of these reasons is sufficient to explain the 30% - 40% hikes we have witnessed.

    Its profiteering on a captive market.

    Can I ask, how did they blow their profits?

    There are a few people that have brought it up but nobody has been able to give any further information / free thinking about insurers investments.

    Investment income has dropped, that much is true. But for some strange reason the drop in investment income coincided with the collapse of the worldwide investment markets. Is that insurers fault?

    Traditionally insurers could pad their reserves with investment income but as the rate of return on the money markets is significantly lower today than it was in previous years that is not possible.

    So please, do share how they have blown their profits.

    All I've seen in the media about it is an opinion piece from the hack that is Charlie Weston and a propaganda piece by a member of the law society. Of course the law society would be completely impartial and unbiased, they don't have a vested interest in claims settlement figures.....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    ^^^ Pure gold - "pay up b1tches, we deserve it! why should we have to tighten our belts when investment return drops!"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    I notice none of the proponents of the "€500 and 2 paracetemol, that'll learn um" solution have explained how genuine injuries will be treated (public? private?) and how much it will cost to do that in Ireland.

    Of course some people don't believe in physics and physiology, so for them whiplash is unpossible.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Can I ask, how did they blow their profits?

    Have a read of the previously linked report to the Oireachtas, Nov 2016.

    "..engaged in cut throat competition... using investment profits ... to cover underwriting losses"
    Rod Munch wrote: »

    Investment income has dropped, that much is true. But for some strange reason the drop in investment income coincided with the collapse of the worldwide investment markets. Is that insurers fault?

    Are you being serious? AIG anybody? :cool:

    And your use of the word "coincided" is subjective. "Precipitated|" would be a far more accurate word. What had been a localised imprudence among american banks became a global meltdown as a result of the insane insurance schemes underwriting these investment vehicles.



    Traditionally insurers could pad their reserves with investment income but as the rate of return on the money markets is significantly lower today than it was in previous years that is not possible.

    No. Reserves should be built upon profits from their book. Long-term use investment profits ( which should go to pay pensions, returns, etc) was and is unsustainable.

    So please, do share how they have blown their profits.

    All I've seen in the media about it is an opinion piece from the hack that is Charlie Weston and a propaganda piece by a member of the law society. Of course the law society would be completely impartial and unbiased, they don't have a vested interest in claims settlement figures.....

    Propaganda? Seriously?

    I take it you earn you keep from commissions on policies written? So its fair to say that a 30% increase in premiums is in effect a 30% pay rise for yourself?

    Vested interest indeed, Rod.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    Have a read of the previously linked report to the Oireachtas, Nov 2016.

    "..engaged in cut throat competition... using investment profits ... to cover underwriting losses"



    Are you being serious? AIG anybody? :cool:

    And your use of the word "coincided" is subjective. "Precipitated|" would be a far more accurate word. What had been a localised imprudence among american banks became a global meltdown as a result of the insane insurance schemes underwriting these investment vehicles.



    No. Reserves should be built upon profits from their book. Long-term use investment profits ( which should go to pay pensions, returns, etc) was and is unsustainable.



    Propaganda? Seriously?

    I take it you earn you keep from commissions on policies written? So its fair to say that a 30% increase in premiums is in effect a 30% pay rise for yourself?

    Vested interest indeed, Rod.

    In the 2.5 years I've worked in underwriting I've gotten a 1% salary increment and exactly 0% bonus.

    The increment did not even cover the increase in the cost of living.

    I was earning more 5 years ago when I worked in a call centre.

    But ya, I'm just creaming it in.

    You seriously do not have any idea how the industry works.

    However you have your opinions and you are entitled to them, there is no point in going around in circles so I'll leave it there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    In the 2.5 years I've worked in underwriting I've gotten a 1% salary increment and exactly 0% bonus.

    The increment did not even cover the increase in the cost of living.

    I was earning more 5 years ago when I worked in a call centre.

    But ya, I'm just creaming it in.

    You seriously do not have any idea how the industry works.

    However you have your opinions and you are entitled to them, there is no point in going around in circles so I'll leave it there.

    Ok, I misinterpreted your comment earlier about the number of policies you dealt with - I incorrectly assumed you were a broker or agent. For that I apologise. I have friends in the brokerage business and increased premiums means more money for them. It also means fewer policies in areas other than obligatory motor insurance, but thats part of the issue here.

    However, the other points remain.

    1. Give us some figures to back up your 15,000 whiplash claims and generally spiraling claims costs.
    2. Insurance companies have only themselves to blame for their current mess. Using motor premiums to prop up investment losses sounds like a fraud to me.
    3. Legal professionals have a right to their opinion as any of us. To charachterise their position as "propaganda" is churlish.
    4. To try and paint every unfortunate person who gets injured in an accident as a fraudster is simply wrong. Insurance companies are supposed to pay out money, thats the idea. To characterise all claims as theft is wrong. Actual fraud, while a problem that does need further work, is a small portion of this issue.

    Now, again, please explain to me why Liberty have tried to extort an extra 500 euro from me and many others this years - other than to make whole their losses from other interests.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    ...
    ...
    Also, you cant just throw these figures around as proof of fraud. Are you suggesting that nobody is genuinely injured in this country?
    ...
    ...
    4. To try and paint every unfortunate person who gets injured in an accident as a fraudster is simply wrong. Insurance companies are supposed to pay out money, thats the idea. To characterise all claims as theft is wrong. Actual fraud, while a problem that does need further work, is a small portion of this issue.

    There is a concerted effort to deny physics and physiology and declare whiplash to be imaginary.

    Anyone can sprain an ankle or a wrist doing the simplest of things, you could put your back out tying your shoelaces... but suddenly and unexpectedly accelerating an inverted pendulum which has evolved for brain size not robustness of the neck... be grand like, they're all spoofers. :rolleyes:


    If whiplash can't be successfully tainted as being a spoof injury, the next step is to pay out next to nothing for it.
    "oh but in country X with a completely different public health system the insurers only pay out Y"... but never mentioning the actual total cost and who picks up the balance of the cost.
    Disingenuous. Deceitful. Why???


Advertisement