Insurance Companies will not Insurer Cars over 10 yeas old disgusting behaviour

Beyondgone

Allinall wrote: »

On what basis?

Do you want a link?
https://www.buildyourcnc.com/images/RollerChainLink40_1-800.JPG

Allinall

Beyondgone wrote: »

Do you want a link?
https://www.buildyourcnc.com/images/RollerChainLink40_1-800.JPG

Link is dodgy

Beyondgone

Allinall wrote: »

Link is dodgy

I wouldn't know. Didn't click on it.

Also to the ^^ going "UK insurance is dearer" -it isn't. No matter what your stats say. And their car-tax is buttons too. People over there whinge at paying £150 car tax. Try ours.. I've a foot in both countries, so before you go "But the stats!".. yeah. Like they say, there's lies, damn lies and then statistics.

Allinall

Beyondgone wrote: »

I wouldn't know. Didn't click on it.

Also to the ^^ going "UK insurance is dearer" -it isn't. No matter what your stats say. And their car-tax is buttons too. People over there whinge at paying £150 car tax. Try ours.. I've a foot in both countries, so before you go "But the stats!".. yeah. Like they say, there's lies, damn lies and then statistics.

Think you need to calm down.

I didn't quote any stats.

But you posted the dodgy link that doesn't work.

Liam McPoyle

Beyondgone wrote: »

I wouldn't know. Didn't click on it.

Also to the ^^ going "UK insurance is dearer" -it isn't. No matter what your stats say. And their car-tax is buttons too. People over there whinge at paying £150 car tax. Try ours.. I've a foot in both countries, so before you go "But the stats!".. yeah. Like they say, there's lies, damn lies and then statistics.

I have provided evidence from a large, UK based insurance aggregator.

You have provided the square root of fcuk all.

So if the link I provided is wrong then kindly provide proof to the contrary.

Agricola

Allinall wrote: »

That's just a load of made up bull crap.

Many insurers don't cover old cars, regardless of having NCT cert or not.

Many insurers wont pay out on a claim involving an old car without a valid NCT.

Pretty simple.


edit - Ive no problem with them not giving a fúck about the NCT. If their risk assessment calculations deem cars over a certain age to be a higher risk, then fine, don't cover me. But don't give me a big song and dance about having an NCT when I look for a policy, or fail to pay out on a claim due to not having a valid one. Just be consistent.

Atoms for Peace

There should be a basic level of insurance cover included with the NCT like they have in Japan or Australia.
It really is not fair that a legally required charge is left to the whims of private companies, it's tax on the poor and financially prudent for the benefit of the gangsters in the motor "industry" and finance.

maryishere

Rod Munch wrote: »

I have provided evidence from a large, UK based insurance aggregator.

And to show how car insurance is higher here, the average price of car insurance in Ireland currently stood at €900 after a year in which premiums have increased by an average of 28 per cent and as much as 50 per cent in some cases.http://http://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/car-insurance-costs-could-rise-by-15-before-mid-2017-report-1.2845583

Zaph

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

Insurance Companies will not insurer cars over 10 years old with a validity nct test this to is Disgusting Behavior from the Insurance Industry of Ireland.:mad:

I recently insured my 12 year old car, so go away with the sensationalist nonsense.

allthedoyles

this is most likely for new quotes . if you already with an insurer it may not apply.

Sosurface

Ireland is completely and utterly a failed society and a capitalist experiment in the midst of going slowly but horribly wrong.

At the most basic level if it's written in the legislature of the state that not purchasing insurance is a prosecutable offence, yet the state doesnt offer any provision of insurance,pretty much FORCING you to buy a product from a private business. This represents illegal state aid to a specific industry surely?

Would a more sensible option not be to sell mandatory 3rd party only insurance at a low fixed fee to every driver, thus fulfilling the legal obligation and those who wish to add comprehensive insurance can then do so from private business. It could be added to the cost of motor tax.

Will never happen though as not too many greasy tills can be filled by cutting out the middlemen.

Eyes Down Field

If you have a current policy with an insurer, they will continue to renew regardless of age of car. It's the switching of companies that causes the problem with age restrictions. Also if you let your policy expire by a few days, your insurance company may say they have to set up a new policy and you could be declined depending on the insurers age limits, usually 13 -15 years old, depending on where you go. I never heard of a 10 year limit.

Liam McPoyle

maryishere wrote: »

And to show how car insurance is higher here, the average price of car insurance in Ireland currently stood at €900 after a year in which premiums have increased by an average of 28 per cent and as much as 50 per cent in some cases.http://http://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/car-insurance-costs-could-rise-by-15-before-mid-2017-report-1.2845583

So taking both the confused.com link and the one you provided as gospel, there is about 5% of a difference between Ireland and the UK premium wise, not exactly the "massive" differences you claimed.

_Whimsical_

123 insured a 17 year old car for me this year without any problem, infact nowhere refused the custom. 123 cost 400.

Liam McPoyle

Sosurface wrote: »

Ireland is completely and utterly a failed society and a capitalist experiment in the midst of going slowly but horribly wrong.

At the most basic level if it's written in the legislature of the state that not purchasing insurance is a prosecutable offence, yet the state doesnt offer any provision of insurance,pretty much FORCING you to buy a product from a private business. This represents illegal state aid to a specific industry surely?

Would a more sensible option not be to sell mandatory 3rd party only insurance at a low fixed fee to every driver, thus fulfilling the legal obligation and those who wish to add comprehensive insurance can then do so from private business. It could be added to the cost of motor tax.

Will never happen though as not too many greasy tills can be filled by cutting out the middlemen.

How much would you charge for the mandatory third party cover?

What happens when the low TP premiums runs out and there are hundreds of millions worth of third party claims to be paid?

How precisely are those commitments going to be fulfilled?

If the government charge for TP cover then they have to cover TP claims costs.

One of two things would happen.

The government would have to increase what they are charge for the TP cover so they can cover the claims or they would have to apply an additional levy/tax to pay them.

So we would end up paying higher insurance premiums anyway!

The idea of having mandatory TP cover and everything being rosey is naive at best.

Until the crippling claims environment and ridiculous awards are curbed then there will not be cheap insurance.

You simply cannot have both ie cheap insurance and disproportionately large compensation payments.

Gadgetman496

I tried 14 companies for my last insurance and 13 of them refused to quote because of the cars age (19) The only company that was prepared to cover me was the company I am with already albeit it at an increased premium.

The car is in incredibly good condition for its age and has a valid NCT. I am also accident free for 41 years and have never received any penalty points.

There's definitely something going on I would think.

SCOOP 64

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

123 insured a 17 year old car for me this year without any problem, infact nowhere refused the custom. 123 cost 400.

Nowere refused not even FBD or Aviva?
i was with 123 with a 98 Astra insurance went up by €250, i went with bank of ireland got a cheaper quote.

The insurance on my 2004 avensis went up by €200 this year to a little over €600 (third party only). I was with AIG and they wanted €800 for third party. Switched to bump insurance as they were the cheapest my broker could find. By comparison I also have a motorcycle, a 2012 bmw which costs €380 for fully comprehensive! The bike is worth a lot more than the car and surely a much higher risk for an insurance company so why is the car insurance so much more expensive?

Gadgetman496

SCOOP 64 wrote: »

Nowere refused not even FBD or Aviva?
i was with 123 with a 98 Astra insurance went up by €250, i went with bank of ireland got a cheaper quote.

Well that just shows how inconsistent they appear to be regarding who\what they will or won't cover?

One thing about my above experience was that the 14 quotes were requested via the Web. I wonder if they have a bot to catch the age of the vehicle and automatically decline to quote on Web based requests? I wonder if it might have been a different response had I spoke to them via phone?

Liam McPoyle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The insurance on my 2004 avensis went up by €200 this year to a little over €600 (third party only). I was with AIG and they wanted €800 for third party. Switched to bump insurance as they were the cheapest my broker could find. By comparison I also have a motorcycle, a 2012 bmw which costs €380 for fully comprehensive! The bike is worth a lot more than the car and surely a much higher risk for an insurance company so why is the car insurance so much more expensive?

If you crash your motor bike you are more likely to injure yourself only.

If you crash a car you could have potentially 4 passengers in the vehicle as well as the fact that an average car weighs probably 4 times that of a motorbike so the potential damage you would do to third parties in a car crash is significantly higher.

It's the third party element of motor insurance that is high as opposed to the own damage.

wordofwarning

Sosurface wrote: »

Ireland is completely and utterly a failed society and a capitalist experiment in the midst of going slowly but horribly wrong.

At the most basic level if it's written in the legislature of the state that not purchasing insurance is a prosecutable offence, yet the state doesnt offer any provision of insurance,pretty much FORCING you to buy a product from a private business. This represents illegal state aid to a specific industry surely?

I would love for you to tell an African living in a mud hut with no running water, no education and no healthcare to have sympathy for you, as you are the one living in a failed nation...

The thing about capitalism and the profit motive society we live in. If there is excess profits to be earned, other enter the industry. Nokia made a killing in the phone market, so computer manufacturer Apple decided to launch an iPhone. Samsung realised, that Apple was making a ton of money and launched their phone. If you look at profit margins in various firms in the US, you will see that most have tiny profits.

'Evil' capitalism results in you have a massive variety of goods with low profit margins to the manufacturer. While under glorious communism you go to a half empty supermarket and with your rations card you decide whether you want a cabbage or a rotting bag of pigs legs. But communism is the best...

The point I am making is if insurance was super profitable other companies would enter the market. A German insurer realises they can make 2% on a policy in Germany or 8% in Ireland. They will sell in Ireland. Yet insurers are making losing money and people refuse to admit it. If insurer is super profitable in Ireland, why don't other insurers enter Ireland?

Why should the state provide insurance? If the private market can sell it with ultra low margins and even loss making. Why would the state enter the market? It makes zero sense. Would you buy €750 off the state for car insurance when RSA charges only €500? You are suggesting the state needs to enter the market to charge €750

lotmc

We have a huge problem in Ireland with fraudulent whiplash claims. That is the main reason why insurance is so expensive - fraud. Pure and simple.
Most (but not all) of the frauds are perpetrated by people driving older cars, so the claims experience on older cars is much higher than newer cars.
So, because of the fact that the fraudsters get away with it from most courts / solicitors / medical consultants, it is inevitable that the rest of us get screwed over.
Seems to be a bit more challenge from some judges and insurance companies to the fraudsters, but it is still a huge problem.
Fix the fraud problem and insurance will get a lot cheaper, especially on older cars..

maryishere

wordofwarning wrote: »

If insurer is super profitable in Ireland, why don't other insurers enter Ireland?

Because we are a banana republic, without the good weather?

ScouseMouse

My understanding of this issue is a certain element of the "mobile society", have been buying cheap bangers, insuring them, and then having a crash with subsequent insurance claims.

This is what is causing your issue. My mother in law had an old 1997 corolla but had no issues like you describe as she was known to the insurance company.

This is my understanding.

please helpThank YOU

allthedoyles wrote: »

this is most likely for new quotes . if you already with an insurer it may not apply.

you are 100 percent right in what you say there. when the insurance companies refuse cover when a car is to old our the do quote you and want 300 to 400 euros more over the age of car the never give this in writing it is all verbal over the phone try ask one of the insurance companies for this in writing ?.

Victor

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

Insurance Companies will not Insurer Cars over 10 yeas

What if you add some 'nays'?:)

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

Insurance Companies will not insurer cars over 10 years old with a validity nct test this to is Disgusting Behavior from the Insurance Industry of Ireland.:mad:

Not quite. They are highly suspicious of people buying bangers and then crashing them

maryishere wrote: »

And to show how car insurance is higher here, the average price of car insurance in Ireland currently stood at €900 after a year in which premiums have increased by an average of 28 per cent and as much as 50 per cent in some cases.http://http://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/car-insurance-costs-could-rise-by-15-before-mid-2017-report-1.2845583

Link no worky.

Sosurface wrote: »

At the most basic level if it's written in the legislature of the state that not purchasing insurance is a prosecutable offence, yet the state doesnt offer any provision of insurance,

Neither does the state provide brakes, tyres with grip or headlights. You'll get prosecuted for not having those on your vehicle as well.

Similarly, the state doesn't give your children food, safety guards for machines or scientifically-tested medicines. But guess what? You'll get prosecuted for not having those as well.

pretty much FORCING you to buy a product from a private business.

Only if you want to drive in a public place, not everyone drives.

This represents illegal state aid to a specific industry surely?

No, it benefits all insurers equally.

Would a more sensible option not be to sell mandatory 3rd party only insurance at a low fixed fee to every driver

The real cost is in injuries and deaths, not the property damage.

Deleted User wrote: »

The insurance on my 2004 avensis went up by €200 this year to a little over €600 (third party only). I was with AIG and they wanted €800 for third party. Switched to bump insurance as they were the cheapest my broker could find. By comparison I also have a motorcycle, a 2012 bmw which costs €380 for fully comprehensive! The bike is worth a lot more than the car and surely a much higher risk for an insurance company so why is the car insurance so much more expensive?

Some insurance claims reach €12m, e.g. in the case of children that will need care for the rest of their lives. That pays for a lot of motorbikes.

Liam McPoyle

maryishere wrote: »

Because we are a banana republic, without the good weather?

What does that even mean?

Are you just taking terms like banana republic and applying them to try and make people think you know what you are talking about?

There is freedom of movement for EU member States.

That means that ANY insurance company that has a head office in an EU member state can sell their products in Ireland with no difficulty.

So lets analyse it.

Apparently there are huge profits to be made in insurance in this banana republic.

Scores of insurance companies can start selling their product in Ireland if they want to.

So big profits available, the ability to trade if they want to is available, yet no European insurers are willing to start selling here.

Now I'm not a scientician, but something doesn't add up there.

Its either a case that the European insurers dont realise that there are untapped profits here, that's possible but on balance, unlikely.

Or it's a case that the Irish insurance market is an absolute basket case at the moment and the risk far outweighs the potential benefits.

maryishere

Rod Munch wrote: »

Apparently there are huge profits to be made in insurance in this banana republic.

No there are not. Insurance companies and the financial services / banking sector have been known to think of this (politically) kip of a country as a "banana republic", as so few of them have made money out of the market here, and some have gone back abroad and withdrawn from the market. "The wild west" they called it.

It is a costly and inefficient place for ordinary decent consumers to buy insurance as Irish awards for whiplash for example are so much higher than in other countries, and Irish necks / backs are so much more fragile, meaning they are much more likely to get injured in the event of an accident.

Quote"“80% of cases here have a whiplash element. In France, it’s 3%. Obviously, very delicate Irish necks have come into play here. There is no doubt some of this is accounted for by exaggerated claims.”
https://radio.rte.ie/radio1highlights/80-whiplash-element-france-3-obviously-delicate-irish-necks-come-play/

Bigus

The best logic I can see from the Insurance company attack on 10 years and older cars is that the Banks asked their colleagues/associates/partners/owners in the insurance industry to help them shift the flood of PCP cars coming back to market after 3 years . Good old capitalism at work, create demand by choking supply elsewhere.

If you're really put out there's some great electric bikes on the market which you can commute on with no interference from the state IE; no licensing or insurance required or excise duty on fuels to be paid.

Sosurface

wordofwarning wrote: »

I would love for you to tell an African living in a mud hut with no running water, no education and no healthcare to have sympathy for you, as you are the one living in a failed nation...

The thing about capitalism and the profit motive society we live in. If there is excess profits to be earned, other enter the industry. Nokia made a killing in the phone market, so computer manufacturer Apple decided to launch an iPhone. Samsung realised, that Apple was making a ton of money and launched their phone. If you look at profit margins in various firms in the US, you will see that most have tiny profits.

'Evil' capitalism results in you have a massive variety of goods with low profit margins to the manufacturer. While under glorious communism you go to a half empty supermarket and with your rations card you decide whether you want a cabbage or a rotting bag of pigs legs. But communism is the best...

The point I am making is if insurance was super profitable other companies would enter the market. A German insurer realises they can make 2% on a policy in Germany or 8% in Ireland. They will sell in Ireland. Yet insurers are making losing money and people refuse to admit it. If insurer is super profitable in Ireland, why don't other insurers enter Ireland?

Why should the state provide insurance? If the private market can sell it with ultra low margins and even loss making. Why would the state enter the market? It makes zero sense. Would you buy €750 off the state for car insurance when RSA charges only €500? You are suggesting the state needs to enter the market to charge €750

The state creates the market. And without offering an option to fulfill at least the most basic legal obligation themselves. They are just actively guiding profits to a specific private industry. What other industry enjoys such a ridiculous advantage? Their right to profit by any means neccessary and charge as they wish is protected by law. Insurance in Ireland is the most protected, mollycoddled industry in Europe. If that doesnt leave even a whiff of corruption in your nostriks you've taken far too much of the kool-aid. Or as is often the case with contrarian arguements in favour of insurance companies/the law as it stands, you work in the industry. In which case the opinions of such an odious c*nt are automatically irrelevant given the self interest involved.